[falcrist]

The statement you quoted is true of both of the examples you gave.

Also, you've deliberately chosen a specific interpretation of my statement in order to manufacture an argument that doesn't exist. You should probably avoid doing that in the future.

[pjmlp]

It is not, because they use C++.

I avoid whatever I feel like.

[falcrist]

Atmel and Xtensa have libraries in C.

It's almost like I have some domain knowledge that you don't. Imagine coming in here with examples that aren't even microcontrollers as if that "debunks" what I said above. Like somehow magically I can just switch to a whole different platform. No problem, just crank out a new board spin and swap my whole toolchain over so I can... what... use a non-standard version of C in the arduino IDE for production code? If you think THAT'S a viable option, you've lost your mind.

Why continue to double down when you clearly have no idea what you're talking about?

> I avoid whatever I feel like.

You should "feel like" avoiding inventing arguments that hinge on misinterpretations of other people's statements. The fact that you don't makes you a problem.

Meanwhile, I can't avoid C even if I "feel like it"... because I write code for microcontrollers... which have libraries that are written in and for C.

[pjmlp]

"1. Yes they are microcontrollers.

2. Yes they use C/C++"

So how it is?

[falcrist]

The things you mentioned aren't both microcontrollers, and they use C.

Why continue to double down when you clearly have no idea what you're talking about?

[pjmlp]

So are you taking back the original answer?

Those are not my words.

[falcrist]

No.

The things you mentioned aren't both microcontrollers, and they use C.

Why continue to double down when you clearly have no idea what you're talking about?