RE: [Dev-C++] itoa - atoi : another implementation

[Ioannis V. <iv...@em...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Per Westermark [mailto:pw...@ia...] 
> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 1:34 AM
> To: Ioannis Vranos
> Cc: 'Dev-C++'
> Subject: RE: [Dev-C++] itoa - atoi : another implementation 
> 
> In a lot of embedded environments, itoa() is king, because of that. If
> a microcontroller have 8kB program area, itoa() consumes 100 byte and
> sprintf() consumes 2kB, the choice is quite easy.


My itoa() was not intended for a microcontroler.



> > The above is not thread safe (since as I saw you try to 
> embarrass me). :)
> > You must place a locking mechanism.
> 
> That's why most implementations of itoa takes a buffer as second
> parameter.


But you said:

> > It isn't even a good optimization of number of source code
> > characters, since each call MUST be either:
> >     free(itoa(i1));
> > which is an expensive NOP instruction, or:


Decide if you consider the free store usage expensive or not. In any case
there wan't any requirement for microcontrollers. In any case you try
intentionally to embarrass me. :)


> www.uclibc.org (Small open clib for embedded systems)
> char *itoa(int i);
> note: uses static buffer


That's nice, mine uses the free store, is thread safe and is intended for
systems which can afford 8 kbs space cost.




Ioannis Vranos
 
* Programming pages: http://www.noicys.freeurl.com
* Alternative URL: http://run.to/noicys