[openbeos] Re: static libs for drivers
- From: Ingo Weinhold <bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 16:58:51 +0200 (MEST)
On Mon, 19 May 2003, Bruno G. Albuquerque wrote:
> On Mon, 19 May 2003, Bruno van Dooren wrote:
>
> > > We need a library that has everything for C++ kernel programming in it.
> >
> > personally, i think that kernel programming should be done in C:
> > -C compilers are a lot simpler, and thus will contain fewer bugs.
>
> Hmmmm... I don't think there are that many strict C compilers around
> anymore. GCC, for instance is a C/C++ compiler. This seems to be a moot
> point. :)
>
> > -C++ exceptions in a kernel are probably not nice.
>
> They can't be used at all. Nor anything that would require a C+ runtime.
Well, in theory these features can be used, if one links against libgcc.a
manually. However, we can make it our policy to not allow exceptions in
the kernel.
> > -C++ contains overhead compared to C. while it is easier to think of
> > things as obkects, this also adds overhead, especially if you are going to
> > use virtual functions.
>
> I recommend you take a look at the OpenBFS code that is in our CVS
> repository. So far it is smaller, faster (or at least as fast) and, due to
> its C++ nature, easier to maintain than the original BFS (that was written
> in C). [...]
Especially the reduction of complexity is a great plus in a part as
critical as the kernel.
CU, Ingo
Other related posts:
