> IMO, the big drawback to _really_ using C++ is the fact that C++ is much
> harder to truly understand, especially when looking at a small part of a huge
> project (like the Linux kernel). With C you can look at an isolated function
> and pretty much know exactly what it is doing (assuming sane use of #defines
> and perhaps with a few "greps"). With C++ you really have no clue what the
> function is doing without recursivly looking at a bunch of class definitions
> and header files to determine which operators are overloaded and what the
> member functions actually do. Of course, with proper identifiers and good
> comments both languages can be understandable but with C++ it takes a lot
> more effort (especially in the design phase, which is ongoing and distributed
> for Linux).
Actually, try to understand the organization of the Linux kernel as a
newbie. The way pointers are used often makes it very difficult to tie
things together. You end up using nested series' of greps and it gets to be
more than a little difficult, conceptually.
I haven't seen much useful documentation of kernel structure, just bits and
pieces. Without that, C code heavy in pointer use isn't any easier to
understand than class-rich C++ code....
lilo