Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 07 Jul 1999 12:32:10 +1000 | From | Dancer <> | Subject | Re: linux headers and C++ |
| |
Alan Cox wrote: > > > new should throw bad_alloc if it fails to allocate memory. If you catch > > and rethrow exceptions properly you can do all the standard releasing of > > That needs exceptions. You will have a fairly bad time trying to handle > C++ exceptions in the Linux kernel (apart from the giant table size g++ > outputs you have to deal with interrupts, re-entrant exception handling and > the like - and of course you have to handle running out of memory in the > exception handler (yes this last one is foul in C too))
egcs doesn't generate thread-safe exceptions, despite what the doctors say. At least not a recent (one month old?) version I got from the egcs project page. There actually appear to be all sorts of thread-safety problems. In a simple app, I experienced heap and stack corruption (often happening deep in the bowels of the first pthread_create call). Dubious, am I, young Skywalker. Highly dubious.
> > > The primary reason I can see to keep C++ out of the kernel is that the user > > base doesn't seem to be large enough to get over the initial barrier of > > making it work and supporting it yet. If it were, the necessary patches > > would already be in doubters hands and none of us would be wasting > > bandwidth on the subject. > > Writing mainstream kernel code in C++ would IMHO be crazy. Allowing people > to write C++ modules seems to be quite reasonable.
Agreed and agreed, IMO...and I think that this is largely what this is about. At least before the witch-burners and the demon-worshippers all turned up at the same cab-rank.
D
- 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/
| |