Re: Linux kernel modules development in C++

[Igmar Palsenberg]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:

> > OO is indeed != C++. But since it's a relative if C, it's the most
> > suitable option to use in the kernel. 
> 
> What's wrong with C itself?

Nothing. What I was saying if you want some OO language in the kernel, C++
is the only option I guess. Mixing languages is a pain..

> > >  - A _lot_ of the kernel code/design is inherently object-oriented. So
> > >    pardon our collective scepticism when YAC++Advocate comes along waving
> > >    the "OO ergo C++" underw^Wflag
> > 
> > OO design had nothing to do with OO implementation. I can design a system
> > totally in OO, and implement it in C. Really stupid thing to do I think,
> > but it's possible..
> 
> Try it someday. That's how VFS/VM/filesystems are done.

Tell my teacher it's a good idea, he is telling otherwise :)



        Igmar

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/