Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 27 Sep 2000 18:28:49 -0700 | From | Mike Touloumtzis <> | Subject | Re: Linux kernel modules development in C++ |
| |
On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 02:30:00AM +0200, Igmar Palsenberg wrote: > > > Again, you don't need to use exception handling in order to use C++. > > None of my C++ drivers use exception handling, and they don't need > > to. > > You implement C++, or you don't. I hate things only partially > implemented / used, it's a pain in the ass. >
(not that I'm defending C++ support in the kernel, but...)
"We'd need all of C++, or nothing" is a bogus argument. It's perfectly reasonable to want to use a subset of C++, since C++ is such an all-inclusive language. At my last systems programming job (at Geoworks) we had a whole graphical embedded OS implemented in C++ and had basically no bloat or performance problems (and it had one of the only Java implementations I've seen that didn't suck performance-wise :-). The problems we ran into were almost always related to crappy C++ support in embedded compilers; it was always nice when we got to use g++.
Of course, 2/3 of our coding conventions were made up of "don't use X feature of C++", where some values of X were "templates" and "exceptions". Even (especially) with that stuff removed, you get a reasonably straightforward language for systems programming. Of course, we also shipped OS + apps as a single, statically linked image (appropriate for a cell phone w/ no MMU), so we also didn't have to deal with the binary compatibility problems that C++ frequently brings.
miket
- 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/
| |