lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [Criticism] On the discussion about C++ modules
Date
From
Eray Ozkural <erayo@cs.bilkent.edu.tr> said:
> Rik van Riel wrote:
> > If C++ really is that good for kernel modules, I'd like to
> > see some code that proves it can be done without too much
> > of a performance hit (or without a performance hit at all?).

> it can be done in theory :)

"Theory and practice are the same in theory, but quite different in
practice" (or thereabouts) Larry McVoy

> > Sending 500 rants to the kernel list isn't even close to
> > being productive. Sending 1 patch is...

> i already made that point. the only proof that it can
> be done is the demonstration of an actual kernel module
> without a grave performance hit.

Performance is an important point, but by no means to only one. Bloat
(source (i.e., wrappers over/around the C API) or binary) is most
unwelcome. Screwing up the API for C++'s sake and similar games is right
out of the question.
--
Horst von Brand vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl
Casilla 9G, Vin~a del Mar, Chile +56 32 672616
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:41    [W:0.094 / U:20.552 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site