From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751328AbWDXVlu (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:41:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751329AbWDXVlu (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:41:50 -0400 Received: from outpipe-village-512-1.bc.nu ([81.2.110.250]:61608 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751328AbWDXVlt (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:41:49 -0400 Subject: Re: C++ pushback From: Alan Cox To: "Jeff V. Merkey" Cc: Martin Mares , Gary Poppitz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <444D44F2.8090300@wolfmountaingroup.com> References: <4024F493-F668-4F03-9EB7-B334F312A558@iomega.com> <444D44F2.8090300@wolfmountaingroup.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 22:52:12 +0100 Message-Id: <1145915533.1635.60.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-4.fc4) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Llu, 2006-04-24 at 15:36 -0600, Jeff V. Merkey wrote: > C++ in the kernel is a BAD IDEA. C++ code can be written in such a > convoluted manner as to be unmaintainable and unreadable. So can C. > All of the hidden memory allocations from constructor/destructor > operatings can and do KILL OS PERFORMANCE. This is one area of concern. Just as big a problem for the OS case is that the hidden constructors/destructors may fail. You can write C++ code carefully to avoid these things but it can be hard to see where the problem is when you miss one. C at least makes it verbose, but we trade that for poorer typechecking and visibility control. Alan