Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 10:38:37 +0200 From: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> To: =?iso-8859-15?Q?V=E1clav?= Haisman <V.Haisman@sh.cvut.cz> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, delphij@delphij.net, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, mag@intron.ac Subject: Re: kern/99979: Get Ready for Kernel Module in C++ Message-ID: <m3sll8bkoi.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org> In-Reply-To: <44B2D2DF.2000401@sh.cvut.cz> (=?iso-8859-15?Q?V=E1clav?= Haisman's message of "Tue, 11 Jul 2006 00:21:19 %2B0200") References: <200607092136.k69LaNDX055391@www.freebsd.org> <84dead720607092015q7f1701abse143f3855c2aa95a@mail.gmail.com> <1152540567.99616@origin.intron.ac> <44B2AE69.4080703@elischer.org> <44B2D2DF.2000401@sh.cvut.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
V=E1clav Haisman <V.Haisman@sh.cvut.cz> writes: > Binary compatibility is always a problem, no mater the language used. > Besides, doesn't the FreeBSD kernel build system always compile all > modules? It can be configured in make.conf if you want only a subset of modules. > Deciding that some features are bad beforehand, before you evaluate them > is IMO bad idea. Let interested people write a bunch of C++ modules with > the complete language before deciding on what shouldn't be used. No, that won't work -- plus you need a bunch of run-time support (libstdc++ isn't exactly something that belongs into the kernel you know). --=20 Matthias Andree
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?m3sll8bkoi.fsf>