memory?... this remembers me about women... you can give the same amount of money to a blond, black, brunette, blue eyes etc. women... all of them they will spend it the same nanosecond...<br>give the same money to a good businessman.... He will use it carefully...<br>
<br>the programming language does not make too much difference neither. Give the same memory to an unconscious programmer he will waste it the same, just in few lines of code whatever C or C++ or C-- his is programming. Only issue could be memory fragmentation, that with a little care could be avoided in C++ as well. Average C++ programmers have no idea how to save memory. But C++ at least helps you a bit more to think in patterns, to keep much more order with less effort.<br>
<br>I think if one keeps for the backend all the legacy (not pejorative ) C code, but coding against a simple widgetset for the GUI in C++ is not a bad idea. Creating a C wrapper, was not really a joke, for only C programmers...<br>
<br>I am not saying that C++ is better for the embedded devices, far from that. Just that Qt has a much better abstraction than other toolkits, and is easier to use than few other toolkits. And besides that produces much better user experience. And it is portable. Encourage programmers to create GUI with QT, in few days there will be somebody who will port that to windows CE as there is QT toolkit for CE as well. Then maybe wince programmers would also think about programming against some more generic toolkit etc.<br>
<br>By the way... did anybody "reverse engineer' a bit the iphone ?or Android?(not necessarily only the code, but gui patterns I think paying a little attention to their way of doing things maybe will inspire a bit.<br>
<br>would not like to offend... just some random ideas...<br><br><a href="mailto:mobiphil@mobiphil.com">mobiphil@mobiphil.com</a><br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:08 PM, David Ford <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:david@blue-labs.org">david@blue-labs.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">do you understand the weight involved with using c++? without very very<br>
careful management, c++ is rather hefty for embedded devices. granted,<br>
having 128M to work in is indeed far more tenable than smaller devices<br>
but it's still onerous.<br>
<br>
C is much more lightweight and very functional. any benefits of c++<br>
usually don't overcome the drawbacks for embedded devices.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
-d<br>
</font><div class="im"><br>
On 06/24/09 07:09, mobi phil wrote:<br>
> Hey!! Is this kind of phrase "i am not interested in c++. " driving<br>
> the linux phone development? I can never understand how is it possible<br>
> to have such a huge gap on the scale between C programmers and C++<br>
> programmers? Why are C++ programmers dying out? Is it because some C<br>
> programmers never managed to get the point with C++ and those who did,<br>
> switched automatically to Java? I propose a C wrapper arround Qt, for<br>
> the C programmers, and everybody will still benefit, beleive me. QT is<br>
> a treasure, is a nice clean code! And it is fast!<br>
<br>
</div><div><div></div><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
Openmoko community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:community@lists.openmoko.org">community@lists.openmoko.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community" target="_blank">http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>being mobile, but including technology<br><a href="http://mobiphil.com">http://mobiphil.com</a><br>