Hello,
Has there ever been a move to formally identify standard library
headers that don't require run time (especially dynamic allocation)
support? An obvious example would be <array>.
The reason I ask is to make at least a subset of the standard library available to smaller embedded projects.
Hello,
Has there ever been a move to formally identify standard library
headers that don't require run time (especially dynamic allocation)
support? An obvious example would be <array>.
The reason I ask is to make at least a subset of the standard library available to smaller embedded projects.

On 2016-01-05 20:16, Ian Collins wrote:
Hello,
Has there ever been a move to formally identify standard library
headers that don't require run time (especially dynamic allocation)
support? An obvious example would be <array>.
The reason I ask is to make at least a subset of the standard library
available to smaller embedded projects.

No, I don't think so.
The standards committee is, in general, not very fond of defining
language subsets. They strongly prefer compilers to implement the
whole language.
Bo Persson
Op 15-Jan-16 om 8:07 PM schreef Bo Persson:
On 2016-01-05 20:16, Ian Collins wrote:
Hello,
Has there ever been a move to formally identify standard library
headers that don't require run time (especially dynamic allocation)
support? An obvious example would be <array>.
The reason I ask is to make at least a subset of the standard library
available to smaller embedded projects.

No, I don't think so.
The standards committee is, in general, not very fond of defining
language subsets. They strongly prefer compilers to implement the
whole language.
The question wass not about a compiler implementing a subset, but
about library functions (or headers, as groups of functions) that do
not need a particular feature that is incompatible with a specialized
use, like heap and execptions (and maybe RTTO) not being compatible
with (very) small micro-controllers.
On 2016-01-05 20:16, Ian Collins wrote:
Hello,
Has there ever been a move to formally identify standard library
headers that don't require run time (especially dynamic allocation)
support? An obvious example would be <array>.
The reason I ask is to make at least a subset of the standard library
available to smaller embedded projects.

No, I don't think so.
The standards committee is, in general, not very fond of defining
language subsets. They strongly prefer compilers to implement the
whole language.
Has there ever been a move to formally identify standard library
headers that don't require run time (especially dynamic allocation)
support? An obvious example would be <array>.
The reason I ask is to make at least a subset of the standard library available to smaller embedded projects.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 295 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 21:00:53 |
Calls: | 6,640 |
Files: | 12,190 |
Messages: | 5,325,356 |