On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 8:17 PM, mohit verma <mohit89mlnc@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi list,
I have a very basic question.
As far as i can decipher , we impose Object oriented paradigm in kernel space using C : like using gates to allow only one way entry and binding functions to structures in a OOP fashion and trying to make them private to that structure only , encapsulation of one struct into another structure (and lots of features ) and itself lots of kernel subsystem supports like driver interface and blah blah behaving like **objects** .......
why dont we use some fully OOPs supportive language like JAVA or partial supportive language like C++ to construct Linux Kernel????
I don't think that performance is the main reason behind all this . Is it??
Thanks a lot in advance.
Read more or even google it. Besides its Design decision by Linus Torvalds Here is the historic mail explaining what he said *From: Linus Torvalds* [email blocked] Subject: Re: Compiling C++ kernel module + Makefile Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 22:46:23 -0800 (PST) On Tue, 20 Jan 2004, Robin Rosenberg wrote:
This is the "We've always used COBOL^H^H^H^H" argument.
In fact, in Linux we did try C++ once already, back in 1992. It sucks. Trust me - writing kernel code in C++ is a BLOODY STUPID IDEA. The fact is, C++ compilers are not trustworthy. They were even worse in 1992, but some fundamental facts haven't changed: - the whole C++ exception handling thing is fundamentally broken. It's _especially_ broken for kernels. - any compiler or language that likes to hide things like memory allocations behind your back just isn't a good choice for a kernel. - you can write object-oriented code (useful for filesystems etc) in C, _without_ the crap that is C++. In general, I'd say that anybody who designs his kernel modules for C++ is either (a) looking for problems (b) a C++ bigot that can't see what he is writing is really just C anyway (c) was given an assignment in CS class to do so. Feel free to make up (d). Linus