Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:09:38 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: C++ pushback |
| |
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > > There's one _practical_ thing you need to keep in mind: you'll either > need 'C++'-clean kernel headers (to interface low-level kernel > functions) or a separate set of headers.
I suspect it would be easier to just do
extern "C" { #include <linux/xyz.h> ... }
instead of having anything really C++'aware in the headers.
If by "clean" you meant that the above works, then yeah, there might be _some_ cases where we use C++ keywords etc in the headers, but they should be pretty unusual and easy to fix.
The real problem with C++ for kernel modules is:
- the language just sucks. Sorry, but it does. - some of the C features we use may or may not be usable from C++ (statement expressions?) - the compilers are slower, and less reliable. This is _less_ of an issue these days than it used to be (at least the reliability part), but it's still true. - a lot of the C++ features just won't be supported sanely (ie the kernel infrastructure just doesn't do exceptions for C++, nor will it run any static constructors etc).
Anyway, it should all be doable. Not necessarily even very hard. But I doubt it's worth it.
Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |