kernelnewbies.kernelnewbies.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: mohit89mlnc@gmail.com (mohit verma)
To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org
Subject: why only C?
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 14:34:01 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BANLkTink11i-7QbTTjsvrcSjK7KvN+bn+Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1301860187.25574.8.camel@thorin>

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 1:19 AM, Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@petrovitsch.priv.at
> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> On Mon, 2011-04-04 at 00:47 +0530, mohit verma wrote: [....]
> > As far as i can decipher , we impose Object oriented paradigm in
> > kernel space using C  : like using gates to allow only one way entry
> > and binding functions to structures in a OOP fashion  and trying to
> > make them private to that structure only  , encapsulation of one
> > struct into another structure (and lots of features ) and itself  lots
> > of kernel subsystem supports like driver interface and blah blah
> > behaving like **objects** .......
>
> OOP is a design issue independent of the used programming language. So
> you actually *can* do OOP with C (or assembler or ....) and I have seen
> C++ programs which do not employ the ideas behind OOP.
>
> > why dont we use some fully OOPs supportive language like JAVA or
> > partial supportive language like  C++ to construct Linux Kernel????
>
> What does it buy and what does it cost?
>
> For - or more against - Java: You really do not want an OS to use an
> interpreted "language". That kills performance. And the more interesting
> challenge is to implement hardware IRQ handlers in Java.
>
> C++ has lots of features which make it awkward to use. For starters,
> think about the fact that Java does not have multiple inheritance.
>
> > I don't  think that performance is the main reason behind all this .
> > Is it??
>
> Did you google for it and read the links etc.?
> You will find much more on this question.
>

  the above two responses can easily describe : **why** did i post this mail
?
 And literally  , i had googled it before posting to this list.

 C++  is not that much stupid  now a days if we compare it to old (1992)
days...... but still C??

>
> Bernd
> --
> Bernd Petrovitsch                  Email : bernd at petrovitsch.priv.at
>                     LUGA : http://www.luga.at
>
>


-- 
........................
*MOHIT VERMA*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20110404/ea18d06e/attachment-0002.html 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-04-04  9:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-04-03 19:17 why only C? mohit verma
2011-04-03 19:23 ` Anuz Pratap Singh Tomar
2011-04-03 19:25 ` Daniel Baluta
2011-04-03 19:49 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2011-04-04  0:30   ` Chaitannya Mahatme
2011-04-04  9:58     ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2011-04-04  9:04   ` mohit verma [this message]
2011-04-06 17:37 ` StephanT
2011-04-06 19:30   ` mohit verma

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=BANLkTink11i-7QbTTjsvrcSjK7KvN+bn+Q@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=mohit89mlnc@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).