|
Ah, well you see that's the difference. a huge amount of what I do communicates with a faster device on the client end that does the display (Automotive electronics)
All I realistically need to be concerned with at the small device end is, does the device read the inputs fast enough, respond to the instructions sent to it fast enough.
In most cases, anything that's time critical is on a GPIO all of it's own, anything that's computed, does so based on input to it's UART, the devices I build are typically sat down in the gunk and crap of the engine block, miles away from the user sat behind the dashboard, and very often each device handles at most only a handful of I/O pins, the most stressful thing I put any of my devices through is upping the serial baud rate 
Display is usually sat up on the dash, and has something like an ARM7 with a decent clock speed and good amount of memory sat on it.
For those cases where the engine end really needs to perform, I'll typically deeply something like a PIC Micro and write it's firmware directly in PIC ASM, but where I can get away with it, I do like using the ESP32 and the Nano framework, as the "head end" that has the display on is very often written using .NET/C# on a device that can handle it.
|
|
|
|
|
That makes sense. It hadn't occurred to me to even use an ESP32 in an application like that. It's a bit heavier than what I'd have gone with but then with the ESP32 you get .NET and I suppose battery isn't an issue.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Nope, no battery problems, as the power is taken directly from the automotive electrical system, and I have a LOT of Amps to play with
The biggest problem I have is trying to make things wireless.
When you have something effectively encased inside solid steel sealed assemblies, your pretty much guaranteed to need a wiring harness, and where there is a wiring harness there is capacity for leaks.
Oil Pressure/Temp monitoring is one such case, which makes maintenance a complete PITA.
I would dearly love to make more use of things like WiFi/Bluetooth etc, but there's often just far too much metal in the way.
One thing we did experiment with however, was to use the entire metal encasing as the antenna, but that unfortunately didn't work too well.
What I work on, is all about taking software design concepts such as microservices, and applying them to hardware, we try to make each "unit" as stand alone as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed that when i feel bloated, everything looks bloated.
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: when i feel bloated, everything looks bloated
Kinda like everybody's pretty when I'm drunk? 
|
|
|
|
|
As a student, I didn't have much money. I was living with a girl then, and we had to cut down on everything - she insisted that we couldn't even spend any money on beer. Jeeez ... being a student with no beer?? But I was obedient.
Then one day she came home having bought makeup for $98.50. I got really mad: You will not allow me even a single beer, and then you go out and spend almost a hundred dollars on makeup! (This is long ago and $100 was a lot more buying power than today.)
Of course she started crying: The makeup was so that I would look pretty to you ...
I made a deep sigh: But ... That's what I had the beer for!
I never saw her again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
the best thing for bloating is a good fart or two. I wonder if there is a way to make software fart.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: I wonder if there is a way to make software fart.
Easy Peasy. Just lay off everybody that works on the test teams. Stink will follow. 
|
|
|
|
|
You've clearly never read any of my "Debugging Messages" when I'm trouble shooting then...
And yes, I have in the past accidently left one or two in, only to get a puzzled email from a client asking why my software is putting a message box on the screen telling him that it "Just Farted"
|
|
|
|
|
i keep working on the challenge of making my code not flatulent 
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
"Computer Scientists" decided to make things more "pure".... 
|
|
|
|
|
'Keep it Simple' refers to the users.
Because users are getting more and more less educated (Friendly way of saying 'Dumber'  ), software needs to be 'smarter' (Friendly way of saying 'Bloated' )
|
|
|
|
|
In regards to the language, you don't have to use all it's features just because they're there. As an embedded systems engineer (retired now), I used a subset of the C/C++ language in my projects.
|
|
|
|
|
0x01AA wrote: Once upon a time c# was such a beautiful, simply/logical structured language
It still is!
|
|
|
|
|
Or have the '?' at the end of the conditional then what falls under it is the answer:
if (x is not null)?
{
do_something();
}
we first ask if x is not null, then the answer would be to do_something(). This does make the language look more conversational. (Yes, this is going off the deep end.)
|
|
|
|
|
I have been using C# since 2000 and am impressed with how contemplative the languages teams at Microsoft have been to evolve the languages to address the computer science issues of the day. As you mentioned, they are now taking on the issue of nullability and providing the capabilities to identify and address the challenges. I have a background in mathematics and SQL Server so nullability has always been something that I have paid attention. But, many software programmers don't even think in terms of, take for example a Boolean where the values can be true, false, or indeterminate (null). The goal of course is to have more resilient code. The addition of null checking would seem like an easy thing to do, until you realize that the entire .Net library needs to checked and enabled to participate.
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm... that seems more like an Easter Egg than a feature... I mean, in terms of fitting in with C#'s regular syntax, it really doesn't... "if (a!=3 || x is not null || b!=null)" ... and so on...
...what happens if you say "if (x is not null || b!=null)" Is that the same as "if (x is not (null || b!=null))? Doesn't work. Can you say "if (x is not 4)"?
|
|
|
|
|
Good call out.
This is a way to future proof against someone adding a messed up operator later.
The ironic thing is that if someone wrote incorrect overrides for “==“ or “!=“ where they neglected null, then the likely outcome would be a null pointer exception from the operator itself.
Legacy code, before someone introduces a bad operator!=
if (obj != null) obj.f();
Avoids future introduction of bad operator.
if (obj is not null) obj.f();
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: With latest c# iteration, instead of x != null, one can write x is not null.
Something else to insist people should not use.
Super Lloyd wrote: But then I tried to override the == and != operators and then.. I understood!
Operator overloading was something that C++ programmers learned to avoid like the plague before C# existed.
|
|
|
|
|
Been using that all over the place. Technically, it does about the same as != null, but I think it's increased readability is a boon. A comparison may look like any other value comparison at a quick glance, but an is not null screams "Yo dawg, this is a very special case here, potentially used for high-level control flow/error handling".
|
|
|
|
|
I've been running benches on my machine, and my CPU benchmark is coming up really poorly compared to other systems with the same CPU. Like 10-17% percentile depending on the run.
I've updated the BIOS (which I think clobbered by hardware virtualization) and updated the chipset drivers.
It's a Ryzen Pro 4750G and I don't know much about AMD, but are these clock locked? If not it could be that others are overclocking theirs.
Does anyone have any insight here? Or know a bit about AMD cpus (this is my first one) and can tell me if these are overclockable at least? That would help my investigation.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
My first thought: cheap slow memory
|
|
|
|
|
My memory benchmark is about average to good. It's not gamer memory but it's decent.
This bench runs separate tests for CPU and memory so I imagine their CPU bench code fits in the cache.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
