From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932463AbWDZVFo (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:05:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932470AbWDZVFo (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:05:44 -0400 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.31.123]:16796 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932463AbWDZVFo (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:05:44 -0400 Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 23:05:43 +0200 From: Martin Mares To: David Schwartz Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: C++ pushback Message-ID: References: <20060426034252.69467.qmail@web81908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > C++ has how many additional reserved words? I believe the list is delete, > friend, private, protected, public, template, throw, try, and catch. > Renaming every symbol that currently has a name from this list to the > corresponding name with a trailing underscore is an easily understood > consistent change. ... which, for the point of view of people developing most parts of the kernel (and thus not caring about C++ much) just makes the names ugly. When some struct member describes a device class the device belongs to, calling it anything else than "class" is silly. But yes, the C++ modules can redefine such things by macros when including kernel headers. Have a nice fortnight -- Martin `MJ' Mares http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth Linux vs. Windows is a no-WIN situation.