What is an embedded system? The general definition is a computer system dedicated to a specific purpose, i.e. not a general purpose system usable for different tasks. That is a very broad definition. I was just skimming the C++ coding guidelines for the Joint Strike Fighter. That’s a pretty big embedded system and the first DOD project that allowed C++! When you use an ATM to get money you’re using an embedded system. Those are basically hardened PCs. Then at the small end we have all the Internet of Things (IoT) gadgets.
The previous articles about embedding C++ discussing classes, virtual functions, and macros garnered many comments. I find both the positive and critical comments rewarding. More importantly, the critical comments point me toward issues or questions that need to be addressed, which is what got me onto the topic for this article. So thank you, all.
Let’s take a look at when embedded systems should or should not use C++, taking a hard look at the claim that there may be hidden activities ripe to upset your carefully planned code execution.
Continue reading “Code Craft-Embedding C++: Hidden Activities?”
On a desktop computer, you think of an operating system as a big piece of complex software. For small systems (like an Arduino) you might want something a lot simpler. Object Oriented State Machine Operating System (OOSMOS) is a single-file and highly portable operating system, and it recently went open source.
OOSMOS has a unique approach because it is threadless, which makes it easy to use in memory constrained systems because there is no stack required for threads that don’t exist. The unit of execution is a C++ object (although you can use C) that contains a state machine.
You can read the API documentation online. Just remember that this is not an end user OS like Windows or Linux, but an operating environment for managing multiple tasks. You can, though, use OOSMOS under Windows or Linux as well as many other host systems.
Continue reading “Object Oriented State Machine Operating System Goes Open Source”
Embedded C developers shy away from C++ out of concern for performance. The class construct is one of their main concerns. My previous article Code Craft – Embedding C++: Classes explored whether classes cause code bloat. There was little or no bloat and what is there assures that initialization occurs.
Using classes, and C++ overall, is advantageous because it produces cleaner looking code, in part, by organizing data and the operations on the data into one programming structure. This simple use of classes isn’t the raison d’etre for them but to provide inheritance, or more specifically polymorphism, (from Greek polys, “many, much” and morphē, “form, shape”).
Skeptics feel inheritance simply must introduce nasty increases in timing. Here I once more bravely assert that no such increases occur, and will offer side-by-side comparison as proof.
Continue reading “Code Craft – Embedding C++: Timing Virtual Functions”
For many embedded C developers the most predominate and questionable feature of C++ is the class. The concern is that classes are complex and therefore will introduce code bloat and increase runtimes in systems where timing is critical. Those concerns implicate C++ as not suitable for embedded systems. I’ll bravely assert up front that these concerns are unfounded.
When [Bjarne Stroustrup] created C++ he built it upon C to continue that language’s heritage of performance. Additionally, he added features in a way that if you don’t use them, you don’t pay for them.
Continue reading “Code Craft – Embedding C++: Classes”
As we work on projects we’re frequently upgrading our tools. That basic soldering iron gives way to one with temperature control. The introductory 3D printer yields to one faster and more capable. One reason for this is we don’t really understand the restrictions of the introductory level tools. Sometimes we realize this directly when the tool fails in a task. Other times we see another hacker using a better tool and realize we must have one!.
The same occurs with software tools. The Arduino IDE is a nice tool for starting out. It is easy to use which is great if you have never previously written software. The libraries and the way it ties nicely into the hardware ecosystem is a boon.
When you start on larger projects, say you upgrade to a Due or Teensy for more code or memory space, the Arduino IDE can hamper your productivity. Moving beyond these limitations requires a new, better tool.
Where do we find a better tool? To begin, recognize, as [Elliot] points out that There is no Arduino “Language”, we’re actually programming in C or C++. We chose which language through the extension on the file, ‘c’ for C and ‘cpp’ for C++. An Arduino support library may be written in C or C++ depending on the developer’s preference. It’s all mix ‘n match.
Potentially any environment that supports C/C++ can replace the Arduino IDE. Unfortunately, this is not easy to do, at least for inexperienced developers, because it means setting up the language tool chain and tools for uploading to the board. A developer with that much experience might eschew an integrated development environment altogether, going directly to using makefiles as [Joshua] describes in Arduino Development; There’s a Makefile for That.
The reality is the Arduino IDE is not much more than a text editor with the ability to invoke the tools needed to compile and download the code to the Arduino. A professional IDE not only handles those details but provides additional capabilities that make the software development process easier.
Continue reading “Code Craft: Using Eclipse for Arduino Development”
[Bjarne Stroustrup] introduced C++ to the world on Monday 14th October 1985 at the ACM annual conference on “The Range of Computing”. On its 30th anniversary [Bjarne] reviewed the history, his experience, and his thoughts on the future of the language in an interview. Also on that day the first edition of his book, “The C++ Programming Language” was released. It’s now available in a 4th edition. The title differed only in the “++” from the classic C book by [Kernighan] and [Ritchie] that graced the desktops of a multitude of C programmers.
The first versions of C++ were compiled with CFront, a compiler that generated C code which was then compiled as normal. Around the 1990s, it’s unclear when, numerous native compilers became available, notably for PCs, which lead to explosive growth from 400,000 users to an estimated 4.4 million today.
One of the frustrations [Stroustrup] expresses is how C++ is viewed by developers,
… a problem that has plagued C++ forever: Poor teaching and poor understanding of C++ even among its practitioners. There has always been a tendency to describe C++ as some odd variant of something else.
Soon the standards committee is meeting to discuss C++17 in Hawaii. Fair winds and bright skies look to be in the future of C++.
Raindrops on roses, and whiskers on kittens. They’re ok, but state machines are absolutely on our short list of favorite things.
There are probably as many ways to implement a state machine as there are programmers. These range from the terribly complex, one-size-fits-all frameworks down to simply writing a single
switch...case block. The frameworks end up being a little bit of a black box, especially if you’re just starting out, while the
switch...case versions are very easy to grok, but they don’t really help you write clear, structured code.
In this extra-long edition of Embed with Elliot, we’ll try to bridge the middle ground, demonstrating a couple of state machines with an emphasis on practical coding. We’ll work through a couple of examples of the different ways that they can be implemented in code. Along the way, we’ll Goldilocks solution for a particular application I had, controlling a popcorn popper that had been hacked into a coffee roaster. Hope you enjoy.
Continue reading “Embed with Elliot: Practical State Machines”