<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How much overhead does C++ bring compared to straight C?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://allmybrain.com/2008/08/09/how-much-overhead-does-c-bring-compared-to-straight-c/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://allmybrain.com/2008/08/09/how-much-overhead-does-c-bring-compared-to-straight-c/</link>
	<description>Where stuff from my brain lands</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:48:38 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Levi</title>
		<link>http://allmybrain.com/2008/08/09/how-much-overhead-does-c-bring-compared-to-straight-c/comment-page-1/#comment-646</link>
		<dc:creator>Levi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2008 22:16:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allmybrain.com/?p=115#comment-646</guid>
		<description>Lots of people use C++ in embedded chips.  You just have to be a little careful about what C++ features you use.  As your first program attests, C++ is almost 100% backwards compatible with C.  Although there are some differences in the labels of the original program as compiled in C and C++, you'll notice that the actual instructions generated are exactly the same.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lots of people use C++ in embedded chips.  You just have to be a little careful about what C++ features you use.  As your first program attests, C++ is almost 100% backwards compatible with C.  Although there are some differences in the labels of the original program as compiled in C and C++, you&#8217;ll notice that the actual instructions generated are exactly the same.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
