Messages in this thread | | | From | Bob Taylor <> | Subject | Re: C++ in kernel | Date | Tue, 12 Jan 1999 19:55:35 -0800 |
| |
In message <369BB95C.17A0ECAD@ut.ee>, Elmer Joandi writes: > ------------ > We're using const pointers and inline function in the kernel already > (supposed by GCC). The question then is the rest of the features worth > the conversion cost to C++; I myself am not convinced. > ------------ > > here is a point. > One thing is to make kernel c++ compilable. That would be a waste > > the other thing is to make kernel headers c++ compatible. > well, at least to reasonable extent. > the point is: it doesn't cost much, why not to do it ? > > > currently people can not, reasonably, compile their own C++ modules.
Well, I want to write *my* modules in BASIC! How 'bout me? :-)
Bob
Why not write the kernel in *every* language? Please *everybody*! :-) -- +---------------------------------------------------------------+ | Bob Taylor Email: brtaylor@inreach.com | |---------------------------------------------------------------| | Like the ad says, at 300 dpi you can tell she's wearing a | | swimsuit. At 600 dpi you can tell it's wet. At 1200 dpi you | | can tell it's painted on. I suppose at 2400 dpi you can tell | | if the paint is giving her a rash. (So says Joshua R. Poulson)| +---------------------------------------------------------------+
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |