[openbeos] Re: static libs for drivers
- From: Ingo Weinhold <bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 16:34:34 +0200 (MEST)
On Mon, 19 May 2003, Waldemar Kornewald wrote:
> > "Ingo Weinhold" <bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Tyler Dauwalder <tyler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > You know, perhaps it would be good if we gathered together a nice
> > > > little collection of generic data structures for kernel usage.
> > > > Unless
> > > > we feel like making the STL available in the kernel; I do miss it
> > > > from time to time... :-)
> > > Hehe. Yep, I also think, it would be a good idea to collect some
> > > generics. The main challenge will be to find a common level of
> > > abstraction. The latest classes I wrote are probably a bit too
> > > flexible, which makes them less convenient to use. Earlier ones were
> > > very simple to use (with like one and only one template parameter),
> > > but
> > > were not applicable (or less performant,...) in some situations. I'm
> > > still struggling to find the balance.
> >
> > In any way, it would be nice to have something like this. Although I
> > think it could be nice to have them in plain C and put them into
> > modules ready for use by driver writers?
>
> I think it would be better to have them compiled into a static library for
> easy use by all driver writers. cpp.cpp should be packet into this library,
> too. We need a library that has everything for C++ kernel programming in it.
Actually this stuff should simply be compiled into the kernel, since the
drivers are linked against anyway. However, this doesn't apply to most
template classes, since they usually consist of headers only.
CU, Ingo
Other related posts:
