Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 16 Oct 2000 11:05:53 +0200 | From | "J . A . Magallon" <> | Subject | RE: [Criticism] On the discussion about C++ modules |
| |
Firs of all, as someone said, is there any other list where we can discuss this ? It is ver off-topic here...
I messed in the discussion because I'm tired of seein people say that they don't use C++ because their big overheads, being slow, messed, out of programmer's control for low level tasks and so on. They seem to not have read anything about compilers or the design of C++. One of the premises of C++ was tat ANYTHING that could be done in C was not slower or used more resources for being done with a c++ feature.
In the kernel you say in C:
generic_driver_init(&my_driver,ñparams); my_driver->specific_init(&my_driver,params);
and in C++ my_driver.init(params), that could be automatically configured to call the generic init also.
and THAT IS NO OVERHEAD, no address fetching to call a simple member, and just the same as in C for a inherited member.
My point of view is that there's many code in the kernel to implement generic to specific inits, functions for drivers and so on that could be generated by a C++ compiler, with no overhead at runtime. Load a module and find the init proc, the io proc, store them in pointers and use pointers to functions to use the driver. Thats hand-writen C++.
-- Juan Antonio Magallon Lacarta mailto:jamagallon@able.es
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |