Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 15 Aug 2000 21:47:18 +0300
From:      Nimrod Mesika <nimrodm@bezeqint.net>
To:        questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: why c?
Message-ID:  <20000815214718.A855@localhost.bsd.net.il>
In-Reply-To: <F27g6A7oPiFEW6sStwN00000d3d@hotmail.com>; from unixboy007@hotmail.com on Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 01:42:48PM -0400
References:  <F27g6A7oPiFEW6sStwN00000d3d@hotmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 01:42:48PM -0400, t g wrote:
> programming classes and all but one of them used c++.  so, my question is, 
> why is everything written in c?  is it simply because unix was written 
> before c++, or is c better for an os?

C is more low-level. You get what you write. C++ gets you further
away from the hardware (adds virtual method table pointers, etc.) As
Operating Systems are basically a device driver for the hardware C
may be more natural (and still people sometimes use assembly).

Of course, that doesn't mean you *can't* do it in C++. See for
example Fiasco (an L4 compatible microkernel written in C++).

> i'm also interested in a good book on programming operating system if anyone 
> has a recommendation (doesn't have to be geared toward unix).

I still have my Tanenbaum's "Operating Systems - Design and
Implementation" (the MINIX book), but I guess it's a bit outdated.
Check the FAQ of comp.os.research for better suggestions (you can
get it at rtfm.mit.edu).

-- 
Nimrod.
http://www.geocities.com/rodd_27


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000815214718.A855>