Re: [PATCH 00/45] C++: Convert the kernel to C++

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 1/10/24 09:57, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 11:25:29AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > For what it's worth, I'm totally in favor of C++20 as well. I've
> > mostly written C++17 as of late and it is really nice to me, but I'm
> > genuinely excited about C++20 and newer revisions.
> >
> > I also think that Linux adopting C++ and intentionally adopting safety
> > features that exist and are being added to C++ over time would also
> > further encourage the ecosystem to use them as well as make the Linux
> > codebase much easier to work with.
>
> Can someone speak to whether the C++ standards committee and C++
> compiler implementations are more or less unreasonable compared to
> their C counterparts regarding compilers being able to arbitrary
> statement reordering, or other random futzing all in the name of
> better benchmarks, but which make life a living nightmware for honest
> kernel developers?

I suspect that the gcc and clang developers are more motivated these 
days about such issues since they are now using C++ as their own 
implementation language.

I had a member of the C++ standards committee reach out to me already, 
and I'm going to have a discussion with him next week.

I have a lot more to say in response to all the (excellent!) comments, 
but I'm about to leave for a long birthday weekend, so my apologies if I 
don't get back to things until next week.

	-hpa