On 08/20/10 08:35 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
On Fri, 2010-08-20 at 03:26 +0700, "C. Bergström" wrote:
Ian Collins wrote:
On 08/20/10 07:48 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
On Thu, 2010-08-19 at 20:14 +0100, Daniel Taylor wrote:
On 19 Aug 2010, at 19:42, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
Out of interest, what language do you recommend?
Depends on the job -- I'm a huge fan of choosing the right tool for the
job. I just think C++ tries to be jack of all trades and winds up being
master of none.
Drifting slightly back on topic, a lot of the ZFS code (and even more
driver code) I've looked at would be cleaner in C++. As long as a
library has a C linkage public interface, there aren't any
compatibility issues. The rest is FUD.
I believe his root concern is/was that libCrun is closed source and a
drop-in replacement won't be easily possible until the compiler switches
over to using the IA64 C++ ABI. (Garrett please feel to correct me if
my assumption is wrong)
That is a major concern. But the problem is also that the ABIs created
by different compilers vary. You can't mix g++ and studio generated
code, for example. That's not FUD, its technical fact.
That depends on the definition of "mix". Provided the interfaces comply
with the extern "C" rules, you're OK.
It's not there yet, but one of the stated goals of the Studio product is
ABI compatibility with gcc.
--
Ian.
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
