| ??? 08/29/08 09:37 Read: times |
#157847 - C = RAD Responding to: ???'s previous message |
I see C as a rapid application development tool. I can develop commercial-grade applications with it. When I need to, I can isolate suitable parts and recode in assembler if I think the C code isn't fast enough.
I normally select a processor so that only execution speed - not code size - may dictate the need for assembler routines. I also find that large parts of the code can be reused when moving to another target processor - even if switching to a completely different architecture. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Assembly vs C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| tools for the Job | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Other languages for the 8051 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| yes | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| C/C++ almost dead for PCs? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| .NET does not preclude C++ | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| C# or C++ | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
yes especially for systems programming | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Multiple implementations | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| re:-) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| to C or not to C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| C = RAD | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| rapid | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I disagree here. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| this again depends | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| you said it | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Ain't this the truth! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Often even worse | 01/01/70 00:00 |