Re: C++ pushback

[Jeff V. Merkey]

Martin Mares wrote:

> > If there is a childish temper tantrum mentality about C++ then I have  
> > no reason or desire to be on this list.
> >    
>
> Can you name any reasons for why should we support C++ in the kernel?
> Why shouldn't we invest the effort to making it possible to write kernel
> modules in Haskell instead?
>
> The kernel is written in C and its maintainers have so far agreed that
> C is enough and adding any other language brings more pain than gain.
>
> If you think otherwise, feel free to submit some real code which shows
> the advantages of using a different language.
>
> 				Have a nice fortnight
>  
C++ in the kernel is a BAD IDEA. C++ code can be written in such a 
convoluted manner as to be unmaintainable and unreadable.
All of the hidden memory allocations from constructor/destructor 
operatings can and do KILL OS PERFORMANCE. Java
is a great example as to why kernel OS code should NEVER be allowed in C++.

C and C++ really show their origins when used in kernel level 
programming. So what were C and C++ originally -- they were grades. :-)

I applaud the LKML folks pushing back on C++.

A++.

Jeff



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/