Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ? - Page 2

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Re: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Many aspects.  Just to name a few:

                 IN 'C'                  IN C++
  '0'            integer const           char const
  //             syntax error            comment to EOL
                 unless C99 standard
  p = malloc(N * sizeof *p)
                 Best construct          requires a cast
  int new;       integer named new       syntax error
  sizeof('1')    == sizeof(int)          == 1
  <<             left shift operator     varies
  const int i;   i is protected from     i is a constant.
                 writing, but can be
                 overridden.

Inquiries in comp.lang.c will bring you many more.  The languages
are different, even though the common subset is not empty.
Thinking of subsets will bite you.

--
"I'm a war president.  I make decisions here in the Oval Office
 in foreign policy matters with war on my mind." -         Bush.
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

goofy sig. IS it absolutely necessary in a programming NG to wear your
politics on your sleeve? Not to mention a sig that is nearly as long as the
posts...



[OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I concede it was too long, and it gets changed periodically.  What
politics :-) - It just quotes GWB, draw your own conclusions.

--
"The most amazing achievement of the computer software industry
 is its continuing cancellation of the steady and staggering
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

--
"The most amazing achievement of the computer software industry
 is its continuing cancellation of the steady and staggering
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

A more optimistic view is that an amazing achievement of the computer
software industry is its continuing use of the steady and staggering gains
made by the computer hardware industry to implement systems that computer
users desire.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

There are some good ones there.  One that I found especially insightful:

Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if
both are frozen. (Edward V Berard)

--
========================================================================
          Michael Kesti            |  "And like, one and one don't make
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)
Quoted text here. Click to load it

The users want bloatware?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quite right!

Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Look!  More pessimism!

Despite your opinions concerning their storage requirements, would you not
agree that current operating systems and applications better suit computer
users' desires than did their earlier counterparts?

--
========================================================================
          Michael Kesti            |  "And like, one and one don't make
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)
writes
Quoted text here. Click to load it

No.... I don't use an OS for the vast majority of my programming.

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England    /\/\/\/\/\
/\/\/ snipped-for-privacy@phaedsys.org       www.phaedsys.org \/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Most 'computer' users have not got the faintest idea what their desires
are and get 'computers' because they think they should and do not bother
to understand what they want to achieve. Then end up with using them as
glorified typewriters, never using the high speed 3D rendering capabilities
of the graphics card, full stereo sound system, rarely play a movie, let
alone create their own DVD movie. Then there is the other half of the
other things that the 'computers' come configured with. That is even if
they could work out how to use them. Don't even get me going on why
next to none to the 'users' actually know about backups and recovery plans
for all their lost important documents and emails taht are mission critical.

--
Paul Carpenter        | snipped-for-privacy@pcserv.demon.co.uk
<http://www.pcserv.demon.co.uk/ Main Site
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Which users? Current operating systems hide port-level and
memory-mapped I/O features from me and force me to jump through hoops
to access them. Current operating systems are considerably less
deterministic than older operating systems, forcing me to jump through
hoops when I want to add some deterministic functionality to a
program. Current operating systems mostly force me to run the system
in an APA graphics mode, when most of my work could be better and
faster achieved on a 132x43 text-mode screen requiring a couple of
orders of magnitude less horsepower to move around than a
1280x1024x32bpp screen. Current operating systems load up a bunch of
tasks I don't want to run, many of which provide security
vulnerabilities. Current operating systems include built-in
applications such as web browsers that nonremovably include software
that is only used for displaying advertising and content-free eye
candy, neither of which I wish to allow on my computer. At least one
current operating system tries to force me to divulge to the
manufacturer where and when I am installing it.

If you want an Xbox, then buy an Xbox and rave about how its operating
system is perfectly suitable for its intended function. The audience
for PCs is considerably wider. You might as well say that all hammers
should be painted pink and come with a 90-foot line that can't be
removed, on the basis that many construction workers might find such a
feature useful.

Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Excellent diatribe.  But, before using the pink hammer, you have
to send in the registration card (at your expense) and wait for
the manufacturer to agree.  If you attempt to strike a friend of
the manufacturer the hammer will explode.

--
Chuck F ( snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com) ( snipped-for-privacy@worldnet.att.net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I would like to object to the use of the phrase "Current operating
systems."  Linux is a current operating system that makes it easy
to access port-level and memory-mapped I/O, works great in 132x43
text-mode, does not have a nonremovably web browser, and requires
no registration of any kind.



Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Ahem. Linux does not give userland tasks IOPL by default. Therefore, it
requires me to jump through at least one hoop, no matter how large,
well-illuminated and conveniently close to the ground that hoop might
be. And I hope now you won't be telling me that Linux has the same
potential for realtimeness as, say, DOS?

I was quite careful in my choice of where I said "current operating
systems" (Note my qualifier of "mostly"). The only place where I think I
should have added "mostly" or "in the main" is the one part I've
requoted above.


Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)


Quoted text here. Click to load it

I wouldn't dream of it. I really like using DOS to load an
embedded program that takes ofer the computer and runs until
someone cuts the power.  I also rather like QNX, but for a
different class of applications that the ones where I use DOS.

--
Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com


Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Most of the people I end up helping with their systems were much
happier and productive with programs like Wordperfect for DOS than
they are with MS Office XP. People who were quite productive with the
former, only needed help when the hardware failed, now asks for
assistance quite frequently. They also needed to upgrade their
hardware to something at least 10x faster with the end result an
overall less reliable and slower system.  These people only use the
new stuff because they do not percieve an alternative.

Regards
   Anton Erasmus

Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)
Quoted text here. Click to load it
... snip ...
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Harrumph - try WordStar under CP/M.

--
Chuck F ( snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com) ( snipped-for-privacy@worldnet.att.net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I did not say that there has been no progress in the real ease of use
and usefulness of applications like word processors. My point is that
most of the stuff added with the dominance of Windows has taken up
CPU resources without adding much if anything for the typical Word
Processor user. The fact that MS Word dominates only exaberates this
for in my opinion MS Word is a bad design, badly implemented. With
many of the older Word Processors people gradually learned how to
do Word Processing - with Word people gradualy learn the short cut
keystrokes of Word, they tend to have no concept of the principles
they are supposed to use in getting the layout they want etc.

Regards
   Anton Erasmus




Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

They also greatly miss the simple "type the name of the program and
hit enter" user interface.



Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Using Windows (which seems to be what this thread's respondents feel is the
definition of "current operating systems"), what prevents them from opening
a Command Prompt window or the Start/Run... menu item, typing their program
names, and hitting enter?

Anton Erasmus wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Then it is their perceptions that are faulty, as there is nothing preventing
them from installing their old versions of WordPerfect, booting to DOS,
and running their computer in the fashion they prefer.

It seems, in both of these cases, that the problem is not the OS, but that
the users fail to learn enough about their systems to use those systems
in the fashion they desire.

--
========================================================================
          Michael Kesti            |  "And like, one and one don't make
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: [OT] sigs (was: Are there any 8051 C++ compilers ?)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Nothing at all, but it is no longer a simple "type the name of the
program and hit enter" user interface.  It is a "take your hands off the
keyboard, put your hand on the mouse, figure out which of 10-50 things
on the desktop to click (or is it double-click?), figure out which of
the 10-20 menu items you want to select, move the mouse to highlight
the menu item, click on it (or do you double-click on it?), type the
name of the program, hit enter, figure out how to make it full-screen"
user interface. You have been using a WIMP interface so long that you
no longer realize how unnatural it is.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Try that on a Windows NT or Windows 2000 system with the default
NTFS filesystem and see how far you get.  Assume that you are an
ordinary user and try it on a Windows ME system running FAT32.
Microsoft made deliberate design decisions to force Wordperfect
users to switch to Microsoft Word.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

No amount of learning about Windows NT will reveal a way for a default
NT installation to boot into Real-mode, run MS-DOS, and run Wordperfect
or Lotus 123.





Site Timeline