sutton050

I have an important distinction to make clear... Cross Compiling is using a machine with a different processor type than the target machine for your program. So, you have a PC with an Intel Core 2 Duo in it, and you use a compiler to output an ARM executable, that is cross compiling. If you're on an Intel Core Duo toting 15" MacBook pro (from 2006 ) and you use that to produce the same ARM executable, that's still cross-compiling.  BUT if you use that MacBook to generate a windows executable it's not cross compiling, as the processor is the same in both targets, you're not crossing over... Some folks argue this differently, because you're crossing between the Windows and Apple OS's you're cross-compiling.  In my book, and by the definition given elsewhere, you're not, in this case you are cross-platform (the platform being the OS) but you're not cross compiling because the processors are the same family. That's all, I just wanted this out t...

When I say not working, I do not mean the function does not work, of course it works.  What I mean is that left to it's on devices the GCC compiler can actually chose to not perform a memset in certain circumstances, you can read more detail about this in the official bug list . So, what's going on?  Well, I have a piece of code which uses a common buffer, each function locks a mutex (std::lock_guard), fills out the buffer and then transmits over USB to target devices, crucially I then want to clear the common buffer. The purpose of this architecture is to keep sensitive information being transmitted through the buffer present for as little time as possible (i.e. the time between filling out and transmit, ~35ms) rather than filling out, transmitting and leaving the data in the buffer; as the time between calls may be anything up to 5 seconds, plenty of time for someone to halt the program and inspect memory dispositions. In pseudo code therefore our sequence looks something li...

This is a plea, from the bottom of my rotten black heart, please... Please... PLEASE stop miss using the inline directive in your C and C++. Now, I can't blame you for this, I remember back in the 90's being actually taught (at degree level) "use inline to make a function faster", and this old lie still bites today. inline does not make your function faster, it simply forces the compiler to insert "inline" another copy of the same code whenever you call it, so this code: #include <iostream> inline void Hello() {     std::cout << "Hello"; } int main () {     Hello();     Hello();     Hello(); } Turns into the effective output code of: int main () {     std::cout << "Hello";     std::cout << "Hello";     std::cout << "Hello"; } What does this mean in practice?  Well, you saves yourself a JMP into the function, and the position on the stack holding the return address, and the RET from t...