But they haven't, so therefore it isn't a good idea, or they have other things to do?
There is nothing in GCC that prevents one from NOT using the C++ features omitted from EC++, so this is a rather specious claim...
EC++ is not an ISO standard, it was a stopgap measure by compiler writers who could not wait for the C++ standard to stabilize.
--Gene
[...]
The rationale makes it obvious that EC++ was developed because a bunch of Japanese chip companies thought embedded programmers were too stupid to be able to use the parts of the C++ language they themselves did not understand fully.
Evidence?
"Thus, a 'mutable' specifier might bewilder the average embedded systems programmer."
[...]Hooey. GCC supports EC++, it just doesn't enforce it.
EC++ is nothing more than a simple subset of standard C++. Instead of adding useful extensions (like memory space control or standardized hardware access), the "committee" decided simply to limit the power of the existing language to prevent possible misuse. Not all the steps they took were bad (C++ was a much better language before multiple inheritence), but there's nothing special about it either.
Other than the buzzword "embedded."
Regards, -=Dave
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required