Sam Ravnborg wrote:
The original question was related to port existing C++ code to be used
as a kernel module.
Magically this always ends up in long discussions about how applicable
C++ is the the kernel as such which was not the original intent.
So following the original intent it does not matter what subset is
sanely used, only what adaptions is needed to kernel proper to support
modules written in C++.
Here at last is a sane response. If the kernel were enhanced/bastardized
(pick one) to support C++ modules, we could evaluate how C++ actually
does in terms of runtime and developer performance.
But I have seen no patches this time either, so required modifications
are yet to be identified.
Since such patches are sure to be rejected (apparently renaming 'struct
class' would wreak havoc on the development process), I doubt that they
will appear. Not to mention the attacks on the submitters that would follow.
--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
