From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 29 17:18:56 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D61A816A417 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:18:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arch@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C68F13C481 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:18:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arch@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ImRZv-0001JL-50 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 10:10:39 +0000 Received: from dhcp-69-07.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.69.167]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 10:10:39 +0000 Received: from ivoras by dhcp-69-07.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 10:10:39 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 11:12:36 +0100 Lines: 18 Message-ID: References: <20071028074310.233895B3E@mail.bitblocks.com> <23408.1193557610@critter.freebsd.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-69-07.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070801) In-Reply-To: <23408.1193557610@critter.freebsd.dk> Sender: news Subject: Re: C++ in the kernel X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:18:56 -0000 Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <20071028074310.233895B3E@mail.bitblocks.com>, Bakul Shah writes: > >> It will be the proverbial camel's nose in the tent. A subset >> of C++ is attractive for kernel work but it will be hard to >> hold the line at that. > > That's one of my main arguments why we should "own the language" we > use. A bit of the "NIH syndrome" here? :) > The other main argument is that we can then teach the language to > do the things we need it to do. The less people know the language, the less it will be used. A "one-off" language (like "K") applicable only for FreeBSD is not exactly doomed to popularity.