ernstsson

4 ms·

1.
Composite as a language feature?(ernstsson.net)
1 points by ernstsson 13y ago|0 comments
2.
Recursive and Iterative Functions(ernstsson.net)
2 points by ernstsson 14y ago|0 comments
3.
Boolean Parameter Elimination(ernstsson.net)
4 points by ernstsson 14y ago|0 comments
4.
by ernstsson 14y ago
Great idea, done!
5.
by ernstsson 14y ago
Sure, zoom in and out with the + and - buttons, resize the browser window to resize the viewer size. That is, when following the links to analysis.ernstsson.net, the images on ernstsson.net are just examples.
6.
Android Jelly Bean C/C++ Components Structural Analysis(ernstsson.net)
15 points by ernstsson 14y ago|4 comments
7.
by ernstsson 14y ago
Well written! I think that potentially hideous code, putting together groups of injected code is one of the hardest type of component get right. My background is in embedded and mobile so I usually expect a stupid OS or perhaps not even an
8.
by ernstsson 14y ago
Well, not reinventing to be honest, rather redocumenting. There's a lot of cavemen behavior that still needs to be taught to "cave-kids". You're correct, an experienced C programmer should know this, but I do expect more to join the ranks.
9.
by ernstsson 14y ago
As previously mentioned in one of the other comments; to "facilitate run-time configuration and testing.". Removing the static coupling has a value in itself, making the component isolated to facilitate unit-testing.
10.
by ernstsson 14y ago
Yes the example used to explain dependency inversion indeed happens to be an observer pattern. Well known yes, at least amongst experienced C programmers, but as mentioned in a comment on the page; "all the more reason that it should be exp
11.
by ernstsson 14y ago
Yes, I agree, it's about facilitating run-time configuration and testing. Not sure I agree with the increasing of code complexity though. Maybe there's an aspect of code complexity that increases with dependency injection. I personally feel
12.
by ernstsson 14y ago
So as a summary to the comments above; Function pointers between files isn't bad for performance if we can't do link time optimization. When link time optimization really becomes widely available, it's still not bad? Just the step in the mi
13.
by ernstsson 14y ago
Good old callback, exactly what it is! In a very simple case like this perhaps the additional state is complicating things, it does have it's uses is many cases though, as described in the post. I personally think function pointers doesn't
14.
by ernstsson 14y ago
Normally compilers does not do optimization of function calls between files anyway, so in this specific case that wouldn't matter. Within the same file it would've been different of course, bringing us to the second point; Yes, in this simp
15.
Dependency Inversion in C Using Function Pointers(ernstsson.net)
48 points by ernstsson 14y ago|22 comments
16.
The Linux Kernel Structure Analysis Revisited - Interactive Map(ernstsson.net)
1 points by ernstsson 14y ago|0 comments
17.
by ernstsson 14y ago
Yes, definitely. I think (or hope?) the main reason for the score is that the directory structure and the actual architecture of Linux isn't fully in sync. Most of the score comes from the top directory tangles and complexity. When I compar
18.
by ernstsson 14y ago
True, Coverity needs to be configured correctly for the target system to get it working for you (I assume that especially Symbian C++ can be tricky). Similar here, the tolerance values for complexity might be set wrong giving us a lower sco
19.
by ernstsson 14y ago
Thanks for the comment, added the link in the post as well.
20.
The Linux Kernel - Structure Analysis(ernstsson.net)
53 points by ernstsson 14y ago|6 comments