Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751106AbVIGKME (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2005 06:12:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751139AbVIGKME (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2005 06:12:04 -0400 Received: from h80ad25ab.async.vt.edu ([128.173.37.171]:16094 "EHLO h80ad25ab.async.vt.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751106AbVIGKMB (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2005 06:12:01 -0400 Message-Id: <200509071011.j87ABcWT018168@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.1-RC3 To: Esben Nielsen Cc: Jesper Juhl , "Budde, Marco" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: kbuild & C++ In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 07 Sep 2005 11:21:42 +0200." From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1126087897_3088P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 06:11:37 -0400 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2094 Lines: 51 --==_Exmh_1126087897_3088P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 11:21:42 +0200, Esben Nielsen said: > I use a RTOS written in plain C but where you can easily use C++ in kernel > space (there is no user-space :-). We use gcc by the way. This isn't RTOS, in case you haven't noticed. ;) > It has been done for Linux as well > (http://netlab.ru.is/pronto/pronto_code.shtml). Why can't this kind of > stuff be merged into the kernel? Why is there no efford to do so?? Quoting http://netlab.ru.is/exception/LinuxCXX.shtml: "The code is installed by applying a patch to the Linux kernel and enables the full use of C++ using the GNU g++ compiler. Programmers that have used C++ in Linux kernel modules have primarily been using classes and virtual functions, but not global constructors. dynamic type checking and exceptions. Using even this small part of C++ requires each programmer to write some supporting routines. Using the rest of C++ includes porting the C++ ABI that accompanies GNU g++ to the Linux kernel, and to enable global constructors and destructors." So let's see - no constructors, no type checking, no exceptions, and using virtual functions requires the programmer to write the glue code that programmers want to use C++ to *avoid* writing. Sounds like "We stripped out all the reasons programmers want to use C++ just so we can say we use C++ in the kernel". So, other than wank value, what *actual* advantages are there to using this limited subset of C++ in the kernel? --==_Exmh_1126087897_3088P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQFDHrzZcC3lWbTT17ARAlXXAJ9X35XWSvOw+EeeqFbERH9MDupzUACgzwOI gLCy+WYI/xHBY9CPEXuZKrk= =oY1N -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1126087897_3088P-- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/