We are running a survey to help us improve the experience for all of our members. If you see the survey appear, please take the time to tell us about your experience if you can.
Hello, I was browsing through older posts that deal with the painful issue of portability (http://www.keil.com/forum/docs/thread8109.asp). I was (and still am) a big advocate of programming as much as possible conforming to the C standard, and having a layered structure that allowed "plugging-in" other hardware. But I have come to change my mind recently. I am reading the "ARM system developer's guide" (excellent book by the way. I'm reading it because I want to port some C167 code to an ARM9 environment) in which chapter 5 discusses writing efficient C code for an ARM. The point is, and it is fairly demonstrated, that even common, innocent looking C code can either be efficient of very inefficient on an ARM depending on specific choices made, let alone another processor used! So, if we are talking about squeezing every clock cycle out of a microcontroller - I do not believe that portability without ultimately littering the code is possible!
management does not seem to be engaged by either software safety concerns, schedules, software quality, nothing. it all does not matter as long as profits are made.
I'm sure some people think that "Human Safety Factors" means they've Factored in the cost of Human Safety, and it will still be profitable to ship without fully testing the unit.
erik, Funny! Justice can be sweet. But, imagine if you didn't document those things that you did. How different the outcome would have been.
--Cpt. Vince Foster 2nd Cannon Place Fort Marcy Park, VA