Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: What is wrong with malloc? (Was: So You Think You Can Const?)
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 19:39:20 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <vlmgoo$2tgip$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vljvh3$27msl$1@dont-email.me> <vlle1n$2n1b0$1@dont-email.me>
 <vlm2tg$2dkpd$3@dont-email.me> <vlm8gd$2rfbl$2@dont-email.me>
 <vlm9gu$2dkpc$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2025 19:39:21 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3992e11e9ac27f7d31c9bec125636fdb";
	logging-data="3064409"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19uOHcx8a67K9vjFb+PH/Ph323oGZqk4EM="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Wisx+KjSx9bWZbRiwqKR1VqXIZ8=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vlm9gu$2dkpc$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2699

On 08/01/2025 17:35, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> On 08/01/2025 17:18, David Brown wrote:
>> On 08/01/2025 15:42, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
>>> On 08/01/2025 09:46, David Brown wrote:
>>>> On 07/01/2025 20:32, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
>>> <snipped>
>>>>> In particular, I am using C90, and compiling with
>>>>> `gcc ... -ansi -pedantic -Wall -Wextra` (as I have
>>>>> the requirement to ideally support any device).
>>>
>>>> People who say they want their code to run on anything are 
>>>> invariably wildly exaggerating.
>>>
>>> :)  I do have embedded, and FPGAs, and even transpiling to e.g. Wasm, 
>>> etc. in mind, my overall idea for now simply being: as long as the 
>>> device comes with a C compiler that is not too broken.
> <snip>
> 
>> Do you have experience with embedded programming (if so, what kind of 
>> devices)?
> 
> TL;DR nearly zero.  Siemens PLCs for small industrial automation, my own 
> experimenting with Intel FPGAs (mainly for coprocessors), plus coding 
> against device drivers for systems integration.
> 

OK.  Small-systems embedded programming is quite a bit different from 
"big" systems programming.

>>> So, now that I have qualified it with "any device coming with a C 
>>> compiler (that is not too broken)", would you think coding it in 
>>> "ANSI C" makes some sense?
>>
>> No.
> 
> Cool. :)  Please give me few hours, maybe less: I will be reading your 
> reply with great interest.
> 

No problem.  I'm glad you think it looks like it is worth reading!