Two responses to a report of a problem with the use of the C++ keyword
"new" in a header file:
>From: Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>
>>
>> This include didn't work under C++...
>
>Erm... Looks like the whole file needs #ifdef __KERNEL__ around it anyway,
>so I'ld rather add it and be done with the thing. Guts of the kernel
>includes are not supposed to work in userland...
>From: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@cern.ch>
>Thats pretty irrelevant, you are not supposed to include the kernel
>headers in C++ programs.
I find this approach pretty worrying. Its *often* necessary to include
such files in user-space programs that use ioctl to control various
hardware resourcs (e.g. linux/rtc.h).
I really hope that we don't have the attitude that these programs
CANNOT be C++. All it takes to ensure header-file compatibility is
avoidance of a few extra C++ keywords (such as "new"). I don't think
anyone is asking for anything else.
If the suggestion is that *no* true kernel header should ever be
included, but that glibc should come with its own versions of them all:
how can this cover h/w-specific resource like the RTC etc. ?
--p
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 21:00:13 EST