From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jun 18 22:41:29 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from kbgroup.co.nz (gateway.kbgroup.co.nz [203.96.151.81]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A436337B9F6 for ; Sun, 18 Jun 2000 22:41:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dave.preece@kbgroup.co.nz) Received: from kb_exchange.kbgroup.co.nz ([202.202.203.10]) by gateway.kbgroup.co.nz with ESMTP id <115201>; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 17:58:32 +1200 Received: by internet.kbgroup.co.nz with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 17:50:47 +1200 Message-ID: <67B808B0DD93D211ABEE0000B498356B02BCC2@internet.kbgroup.co.nz> From: Dave Preece To: Warner Losh Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Quickie: C++ statically linked into kernel? MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 17:58:27 +1200 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I've run C++ code in the kernel. You couldn't easily use: templates, > exceptions, global ctors, and sometimes you had to be careful with > automatic instantiation of things. Nothing too smart, OK. I tend to write fairly agricultural code anyway. > I implemented only new and delete > and was able to get sample code to run in the kernel. Euuww. So the default new and delete need to be overloaded with the kernel mode variety? (the three-parameter'd one from sys/malloc.h)? Right, OK. > I punted at > that point due to the pain in actually knowing if these things were > being used or not. Due to the pain of not knowing if the overloaded new and delete were being used? --scrambles off for a copy of Stroustrup. > Warner Dave To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message