Re: Compiling C++ modules

Peter Williams
2006-05-02T23:55:22Z

Al Boldi wrote:
> Christer Weinigel <christer@weinigel.se> wrote:
>
>>>eCos is nice enough -- because it's mostly C :)
>>
>>And those parts that are C++ (from a 2 year old eCos dist) won't
>>compile with a modern g++.
>
>
> C++ is OO,

But not a very good implementation of it :-(.

> and OO is great! OO is the natural way of doing things, and
> allows one to concentrate on the issues at hand, while leaving the
> nitty-gritty to the compiler to decide.
>
> And this is the problem, as kernel development is highly sensitive to
> compiler output, and which is why there are parts written in asm and others
> in C.
>
> So rewriting C with C++ would be as dumb as rewriting asm with C.
>
> But there may be certain higher level parts in the kernel that could benefit
> from rewriting C with C++, much the same as lower level parts have benefited
> from rewriting them in asm.
>
> So we have a situation like this:
>
> low-level written in asm when needed
>
> main-level written in C mostly
>
> high-level written in C++ when needed
>
> Note though, C++ is not currently viable for kernel development, due to its
> enormous overhead generated by immature compiler technology. Once this has
> matured, there should be no problem.
>
>
>>--
>>"Just how much can I get away with and still go to heaven?"
>
>
> Just know that HE is one and only one.
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Al
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

--
Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au

"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
-- Ambrose Bierce