Cast not your Perl before swine?

Levi Pearson levi at
Mon Dec 17 11:32:33 MST 2007

"Bryan Sant" <bryan.sant at> writes:
> How realistic is it to use D for embedded development?  I guess both
> C++ and D require you to lug a runtime along with you (unless you
> compile statically).  Is that a big deal with your specific
> application to avoid that kind of overhead?  Even in the embedded
> world, it seems that memory and CPU power are easier and easier to
> come by.

I have written a few programs in D, and it seems to be a pretty decent
language in the C family, though it was a bit of a moving target and
severely underdocumented when I used it.  I used the gcc backend, so
theoretically it would be fairly easy to cross-compile with it, but
until recently I was targeting a poorly supported chip and couldn't
even get the C++ runtime to build for it.

Probably the primary reason not to use D for embedded work is that the
development toolkits for embedded boards tend to be custom gcc setups,
and pulling them apart so you can use your own toolchain can be
perilous and time-consuming.  Also, there aren't a lot of D
programmers around, and probably few of them are embedded systems


More information about the PLUG mailing list