On Wed, 2006-04-26 12:25:19 -0700, David Schwartz <[email protected]> wrote: [Variable names that are reserved in C++] > And, FWIW, it isn't even necessary to change those names. That is only > needed to compile the kernel in C++, which is not what anyone was talking > about. Supporting C++ modules, for example, would work fine even if the > kernel had variables called 'class' or 'private'. (Though things could be > done a lot more cleanly if it didn't as it would require some remapping > before and after compilation.) There's one _practical_ thing you need to keep in mind: you'll either need 'C++'-clean kernel headers (to interface low-level kernel functions) or a separate set of headers. For separate headers, I see the problem of keeping them synchronized with the kernel. The clean-up-kernel-headers-for-userspce-consumption guys already took that bullet once and up to now, there's no "real" result. (That's while we all know that kernel values *are* somewhat for the userspace guys:-) I see an even smaller user-base for separate C++ kernel headers (and thus more work per person)--and I think that the current in-kernel headers just won't be C++ compatible, ever[*]. MfG, JBG [*] Famous last words... -- Jan-Benedict Glaw [email protected] . +49-172-7608481 _ O _ "Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg _ _ O für einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger" | im Internet! | im Irak! O O O ret = do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(NEW_COPYRIGHT_LAW | DRM | TCPA));
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: C++ pushback
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: C++ pushback
- References:
- RE: C++ pushback
- From: Matthew Frost <[email protected]>
- RE: C++ pushback
- From: "David Schwartz" <[email protected]>
- RE: C++ pushback
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 3/5] Remove redundant NULL checks before [kv]free - in arch/
- Next by Date: Re: [git patch] fuse fixes
- Previous by thread: RE: C++ pushback
- Next by thread: Re: C++ pushback
- Index(es):
 |