19-12-2007, 11:26 AM
Gruss Gott Alan,
To answer some of your points:
Training:- New programmers need training anyway. A good coding standard stops bad habits and promotes a much better Engineering understanding of the language.
Far too many have bad habits that look \"cool!\" which store up trouble later on. So Training on MISRA is not a cost as it saves time later. I can give anecdotal evidence for this.
Actually it is not just new programmers but old ones too... Besides using an automated static analyser should pick up most of the MISRA rules anyway... So the programmers are trained by the tools and this does not cost time or effort.
Code bloat: Space in source code is free. Space in the binary is important In fact I will dig out an example I have of a piece of code that is twice as long with more variables and another more compact, less readable, piece of code that does the same thing.
Not only was the resultant binary the same size but the one with the longer source was much easier to debug both at source and assembler level using an ICE.
I would expect that within a few weeks the MISRA team will produce a paper or something to show that MISRA C does save time/money/errors etc since you have raised a the spectre of the Emperors New Clothes! They have to show that the emperor IS wearing new cloths and it is not just a con. Especially as they are now starting MISRA-C 3
On the other side what evidence do you have that MISRA-C DOES bloat code and DOES cost (overall) for training etc
Best wishes for the Season
MMouse
To answer some of your points:
Training:- New programmers need training anyway. A good coding standard stops bad habits and promotes a much better Engineering understanding of the language.
Far too many have bad habits that look \"cool!\" which store up trouble later on. So Training on MISRA is not a cost as it saves time later. I can give anecdotal evidence for this.
Actually it is not just new programmers but old ones too... Besides using an automated static analyser should pick up most of the MISRA rules anyway... So the programmers are trained by the tools and this does not cost time or effort.
Code bloat: Space in source code is free. Space in the binary is important In fact I will dig out an example I have of a piece of code that is twice as long with more variables and another more compact, less readable, piece of code that does the same thing.
Not only was the resultant binary the same size but the one with the longer source was much easier to debug both at source and assembler level using an ICE.
I would expect that within a few weeks the MISRA team will produce a paper or something to show that MISRA C does save time/money/errors etc since you have raised a the spectre of the Emperors New Clothes! They have to show that the emperor IS wearing new cloths and it is not just a con. Especially as they are now starting MISRA-C 3
On the other side what evidence do you have that MISRA-C DOES bloat code and DOES cost (overall) for training etc
Best wishes for the Season
MMouse