[Email Advisor Warning: language flamewar brewing, possibility 60%. Dump message? NO. Are you sure? YES. Really? YES. Really Re^C^C]
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 05:22:17PM +0300, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote: > On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 13:28, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: > > > As for implying that we might write kernel modules in C++, sir, such a > > comment would cause me (as a Qlusters kernel hacker) to demand > > satisfaction at dawn, sir. I'll settle for a beer after the revolution > > OS event, though ;) > > > > Sorry to burst your bubble, but one of the coolest pieces of code I had > the fortune to work with the in the past is the Click Modular Router and > it is implmented as C++ classes and objects and can run in kernel space > (as well as out of it). Sorry, Gilad, but I have a hard time believing you can use c++ code in the kernel and still have anything that remotely resembles c++ *as it should be written*, rather than souped up c. Whatever happened to "the right tool for the job"? I'll go check the source out now. It's too hot to actually get any work done today ;) Ok, a quick look shows what I expected it to show, c++ code that looks like c in first and second glance. No templates, in inheritance, no overloading, none of the things that make c++ c++. In the kernel, I don't care if the struct is called 'class', and if you pass an object by reference instead of by pointer, and if you have a string class, instead of a char*. Don't get me wrong, I LIKE c++ and I like coding in it - in userspace. I just don't see what adding c++ to the kernel buys you. > BTW, if you think this is the work of the devil you be amused to > discover that one of the main co-authors of this fine project is none > other then Robert Morris or RTM to his friends, creator of the Great > Worm himself. I was wondering whatever became of him. > http://www.pdos.lcs.mit.edu/click/ -- Highday 19 Forelithe 7466 http://vipe.technion.ac.il/~mulix/ http://syscalltrack.sf.net/
msg19939/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
