Hacker News Reader

Comment by nprescott | Hacker News Reader

If you are looking for a full course this one isn't bad: Embedded Systems Shape the World[0] it does hew pretty close to platform specifics (Windows/Keil/TI Launchpad) which can be good for specifics and not good for holistic understanding.

I have had a lot of fun following Ben Eater's[1] projects, which aren't always embedded-specific (sometimes they're TTL, sometimes Arduino) but are excellent for understanding concepts deeply.

I tend to learn best with a specific project that can grow or morph as my interest or experience dictates. You might find something to build with an Arduino, using the toolchain/IDE/libraries, get it working and then start stripping out libraries for your own implementations, or getting a toolchain of your own to cross-compile and flash.

[0]: http://www.edx.org/course/embedded-systems-shape-the-world-m...

[1]: https://eater.net/

View on HN

From a C-veteran perspective, what do you think about type safe (e.g. dependent types such in ATS, or F*/KreMLin, or other DSLs) languages that compile to C, or a subset of C?

How could one get the safety promises that are observed in Rust in C?

Thanks!

I'm not the OP you're asking, I'll provide my own answer to the latter question though.

C is a language that doesn't come with many guarantees. I personally like to think of C as a 'higher-level assembler', targeting a virtual machine. I've been led to believe that this figurative description of the language was more common in the past than it is today. I find it a helpful description since it offers an explanation for many of C's design choices. Such as it's weak types and use of pointers. If I'm correct it's also an accurate description of the language's original aims in system development.

Also, Rust isn't the only systems programming language with a focus on safety. Ada has been around for some time now and is a much more mature language and arguably more suited for the job. It has a demonstrable track record of successful use in safety-critical software. Rust is definitely more 'C-like' than Ada, which might make it preferable to many.

I see. Thank you very much for your explanation.

I always thought that after so many years, there must be a testing framework, development tools and methodology to give a C developer the safety that his problem requires. What do people use when they are programming critical systems e.g. defense,health,flight control, etc. Problems like Heartbleed et al are not something that can be ignored in the industry.

That is why I wondered about advanced tools I heard about e.g. ATS, Compcert, and so on. As I understand, the model that is used in Rust comes with limitations in regard to program design.

Thanks for the recommendations! That's how I like to learn as well, and kind of why I started learning C in the first place. Tinkering with electronics is super fun (I think).

I actually have built the clock module from Ben Eater with the intent of building the 6502 computer project at some point in the future. I really like his stuff.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com