[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Re: sprintf

From: David VanHorn
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Re: sprintf
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 15:28:06 -0500

Unless your "big iron" guys are similarly inexperienced (being a beginner is a good excuse for many mistakes), then they are incompetent.  There is *no* excuse for a knowledgeable programmer using an inefficient and unsafe function in such a horribly unclear manner
I disagree, but I'm closer to the situation.  They are under a lot of pressure, and helping me out is something they do in odd moments.  I'm happy for what I can get.

Having lots of memory and processor resources available is not a reason to write rubbish.  It *is* a good reason for prioritising development time over run-time (that's why I often write PC software in Python, not C).  If you want to go to the shop two miles away, you might take your car - it's faster and easier, even if it costs more than walking.  But you don't get your car out the garage to drive to your post box at the bottom of the garden - that's the equivalent of using sprintf in this case.
I agree.  Sprintf certainly wasn't optimal, but it did WORK, and that was my main concern at the moment.

> I will admit to being ignorant in C, but I'm not stupid.  :)

Don't worry, ignorance is curable :-)
Yup.. Working on it. :)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]