lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jul]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: linux headers and C++
    Date
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
    To: <fbutter@ottomall.com.tw>
    Cc: <Jes.Sorensen@cern.ch>; <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu>
    Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 1999 11:23 AM
    Subject: Re: linux headers and C++


    > Please don't confuse object oriented with C++. Decent programmers can
    write
    > object oriented assembler, fortran or even cobol (although they normally
    leave
    > in the latter case). Linux is heavily object oriented but without using a
    > glorified pre-processor on it

    I don't feel Linux is *so* object oriented.
    Apart from this C++ is no more just a
    pre-processor. Of course a C and ASM
    hacker could feel in this way, but it's not
    true; C++ could be used as an improved-C
    or as a full-featured OO-language. Using
    C or ASM or another language in an OO
    way without a specific support for this could
    lead to more complications that it's worth (i.e.
    you could program as you have inheritance
    without having a keyword to do it, but it's
    very difficoult to keep the code clean).

    Looking at the Linux source tree, I don't
    think Linux is OO. But I personally
    don't feel it as a limitation per se. WinNT
    is (maybe?) OO. What's the result? The
    only things that count, at the end, are the
    results. Linux could be not OO, but the
    sources are (quite) always clean and
    understandable.


    Bye

    Marco



    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.054 / U:89.336 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site