Julian Elischer wrote, On 10.7.2006 21:45: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Joseph Koshy wrote: >> >>>> I would write my kernel module in C++, just like IOKit >>>> of OpenDarwin. Thus, all conflicts against C++ in current >>>> FreeBSD kernel source must be swept out firstly. >>> > While the idea of using C++ in the kernel made me very nervous, > I have seen some places where an official subset might be useful. > is it worth having a discussion about what features of C++ (or modular C) > we would want to support and what would remain "illegal" in the kernel? > > Inherritance would be noce but there are traps.. e.g. > How do you cope with classes depending on superclasses that may be from > a different > module and may have been compiled at a different time? > (i.e. the base structure may have changed) Binary compatibility is always a problem, no mater the language used. Besides, doesn't the FreeBSD kernel build system always compile all modules?
Deciding that some features are bad beforehand, before you evaluate them is IMO bad idea. Let interested people write a bunch of C++ modules with the complete language before deciding on what shouldn't be used. My $0.05... -- Vaclav Haisman
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
