Re: Compiling C++ modules

["J.A. Magallon" <jamagallon@able.es>]

On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 21:45:46 +0100, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> makes without exceptions being used. It might be possible to move to a
> strict C++ subset in the style of Apple but there isn't much interest in
> this.
>

Probably there will be two fields where a subset of C++ would give a big
save to the kernel:
- All that 'hand-coded' object orientation ans inheritance makes tons of
  structs repeating function pointers and the like, and using tricky
  rules to be sure nobody creates a class without a pure virtual method
  (funtion pointer). Binary space.
- You are doing in source code what the compiler should do for you.

> There are other problems too, notably the binary ABI between the C and C
> ++ compiler might not match for all cases (in particular there are
> corner cases with zero sized objects and C++).
>

There is no point in interfaccing C and C++. But a full C++-subset kernel
would be equally fast and probably safer to write code for that this.

But things are like they are. Kernel is C.

--
J.A. Magallon <jamagallon()able!es>     \               Software is like sex:
werewolf!able!es                         \         It's better when it's free
Mandriva Linux release 2006.1 (Cooker) for i586
Linux 2.6.16-jam9 (gcc 4.1.1 20060330 (prerelease)) #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature