3 ms·
Good embedded programmers are good programmers, period. They have to be. Today, we're seeing that even embedded programmers are getting lazy, because 32-bit A
by dublin 9y ago
Good embedded programmers are good programmers, period. They have to be. Today, we're seeing that even embedded programmers are getting lazy, because 32-bit ARM core parts and plentiful RAM allow wasteful and error-prone approaches to programming.
- fapjacks 9y agoWell, "good embedded programmers" are a subset of "good programmers" so yes. The point I'm making is that as embedded programmers get more experienced, we are able to do more with less. And so the hallmark of a good embedded programmer is not only writing less code that is more efficient than sub-good embedded programmers, but then doing so without sacrificing any of the code clarity and maintainability and secure patterns that all good programmers strive for regardless of what kind of programmer they are. It's the same concept the article talks about, just flipped on its head because of the environment. Also incidentally, in my experience, good embedded programmers are less prone to "get lazy" on devices with sprawling amounts of resources than less experienced embedded programmers. Hungry dogs run faster, yes, but for example just because we've been given a generous 32KB of program space doesn't mean we're going to use it all up in a fit of laziness or start cramming in the features.
- marssaxman 9y agoThat is exactly why I got into embedded programming, and then back out again: it seemed like one of the few areas of software development which still offered a real challenge, but it quickly became obvious that Moore's Law was catching up, and that I had arrived near the end of the party.