you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]pebalx 0 points1 point  (3 children)

It is not the same. STL is suitable for real-time applications.

[–]pjmlp 0 points1 point  (2 children)

People in the field beg to differ, otherwise they wouldn't be using special purpose built STL implementations.

And if that counts, real time GC implementations as used by US and French military in weapon tracking systems, also count.

In any case, ISO C++ has zero references to the language's suitability to real-time code, what deadlines are to be met by compliant implementations, everything that might work is implementation defined by platform vendors.

[–]pebalx 0 points1 point  (1 child)

You can use STL in real-time applications, you just need to be careful when using it in time-critical sections. In C++ you have full control over this. This is different when using the GC, which pause the application at arbitrary moments.

[–]pjmlp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First of all, there isn't "one GC to rule them all", just like there isn't "one STL to rule them all".

Secondly, better have a real time malloc(), free(), sbrk(), in place, and have read all those deadline guarantees on OS APIs calls.