3 ms·
> … there is hardly a modern 16 bit CPU that doesn't have a C++ compiler There are quite a few besides various PICs AFAIK, how modern they are is subjective I
by throw-qqqqq 1y ago
> … there is hardly a modern 16 bit CPU that doesn't have a C++ compiler
There are quite a few besides various PICs AFAIK, how modern they are is subjective I guess, and it IS mostly the weaker chips. Keil, Renesas, NXP, STMicro (STM8 MCUs used to be C only, not sure today) all sell parts where C++ is unsupported.
> Nowadays the only reason many embedded developers keep using C is religous.
I don’t completely agree, but I see where you are coming from.
The simplest tool that gets the job done is often the best IMO.
In my experience, it is much more difficult to learn C++ well enough to code safely, compared to C.
Many embedded developers are more EE than CS, so simpler software is often preferred.
I know you don’t have to use all the C++ features, all at once, but still :)
Horses for courses. I prefer C for anything embedded.