Re: What if?

[Horst von Brand]

linux-os <linux-os@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
> On Sun, 5 Dec 2004, Horst von Brand wrote:

[...]

> > C++ is sufficiently not C that for such it is probably best to just
> > redesign the systems. Well done it is probably more elegant than C, but to
> > get there is a _lot_ of work.

> There is another problem. The kernel requires a procedural language
> to communicate with hardware. Interface with hardware is all about
> the step-by-step methods necessary to make hardware run. C++ tries
> to isolate one from the actual methods involved. That's what it
> was designed for.

If you want isolation. The actual methods (I'm assuming function members)
are written in procedural style if you want to.

> One would need to use "extensions" just to get text to the screen.  'C'
> being an "smart" assembler, is nearly ideal for kernel development.

And C++ is supposed to be an OO extension to C, designed to give a
(knowledgeable) programmer exactly the same low-level control as C when
needed (knowlegdeable, tasteful programmer is requisite).
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                     Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria              +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile                Fax:  +56 32 797513
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/