Re: Linux kernel modules development in C++

From: Ragnar Hojland Espinosa (ragnar@macula.net)
Date: Thu Sep 28 2000 - 13:18:41 EST

On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 01:45:40AM +0200, Igmar Palsenberg wrote:
> Some arguments why not to use it in the kernel :
>
> - C++ gives overhead. With something like a kernel that's unwanted.

You pay for what you use, no less no more. C++ compilers don't generate
bloated code `per se' but, yes, it's easier to make mistakes that degenerate
into bloatedness.

> - Things like exception handling is hard to do in a kernel.

You don't need it. And if you don't use it you don't pay for it.

> - The're a lot more people that know C than C++

Let's put it the other way... there aren't many people who know
C++ around. Well, there are less people who understand the kernel. Then,
maybe, to make it more accessible, we should dumb it down.

> And I probably forgot a few :)

Sure :)

Someone mentioned they preferred C because they knew exactly what the
compiler would be generating. I wonder if they got this knowledge in some
magic way, and what makes them think that they couldn't learn what C++
compilers do (at least G++)

Of course, yes, I do agree that if the kernel is in C and putting in C++
requires more than some little localized glue or similar, C++ shouldn't go
in.

But I'll never understand this C++ aversion. 

-- 
____/|  Ragnar Højland     Freedom - Linux - OpenGL      Fingerprint  94C4B
\ o.O|                                                   2F0D27DE025BE2302C
 =(_)=  "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer for      104B78C56 B72F0822
   U     chaos and madness await thee at its end."       hkp://keys.pgp.com

Handle via comment channels only.
-
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/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 30 2000 - 21:00:22 EST