[openbeosstorage] Re: Partitioning rethink
- From: Tyler Dauwalder <tyler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeosstorage@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 23:30:09 -0800
On 2003-03-19 at 12:06:08 [-0800], Axel D=F6rfler wrote:
> Tyler Dauwalder <tyler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > And while I'm thinking of it, Axel, can we add your modified=20
version
> > of
> > the iso9660 add-on to the cvs=3D3F Also, do you mind if I move the
>=20
> Sure, but it will only work under R5 as of now :-)
Why is that?
> And please don't be to harsh on me - it's really some kind of a=20
hack=20
> ;-))
Hey, if it works, that's what matters for the time being. Thanks! :-)
> > cpp.{h,cpp} files from BFS to somewhere more public so the rest of
> > the
> > kernel can share them=3D3F
>=20
> Well, we can do it for now - if we'll find any problems with it at a
> later date, we can simply remove them again.
> The most public location for the header would be os/drivers/, a less
> one private/kernel/.=20
Well, if there's no good reason not to have it in os/drivers, I guess=20
I'd vote for that.
> The cpp.cpp should probably be part of the src/
> kernel/core directory, right?
Sounds good to me. If they don't mysteriously move to those locations=20
by the time I get around to checking in my first round of udf stuff,=20
I'll go ahead make the move, okay?=20=20
> > > Similarly the other modules would get respective objects. With=20
the
> > > Axel may for instance object, that C++ in the module interface=20
is
> > > not
> > > exactly something he likes -- which could be worked around by=20
> > > using
> > > ugly ;-) C structures instead -- or something else I don't think
> > > of, and
> > > perhaps wouldn't have an answer to...
> > Yeah, I like that idea. And C++ (or something very similar) works=20
> > for
> > me. :-)
>=20
> I am not completely against introducing C++ API in the kernel=20
itself -
> but if we do, it *must* only be used for a specific case, and not be
> usable by any other kernel components.
Okay.
> We shouldn't force anyone to switch to C++ to use a kernel service
> right now.
Why not? (I'm just curious, not challenging; I do enjoy making cranky=20
C programmers stretch their horizons ;-)
-Tyler
Other related posts:
