kern/99979: Get Ready for Kernel Module in C++
babkin at verizon.net
Wed Jul 12 15:14:56 UTC 2006
>From: mag at intron.ac
>Jason Slagle wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, mag at intron.ac wrote:
>>> I would repeat several sentences in my last reply.
>>> Why would people write Windows application with rather MFC/ATL/.NET
>>> Framework than direct Windows API? Why is gtkmm framework created for
>>> GTK+? Would you write a X11 application with original X11 API, without QT
>>> or other X11 toolkit? I believe the answer is that all programmers are
>>> human begins, not
>>> machines. Human programmer would reduce brainwork, even if an API
>>> package/wrapper slightly reduces running efficiency.
>> And this is why office 2003 takes longer to load on a 2.4ghz machine then
>> office 97 did on a 233.
>Why don't you say that Office 2003 is more powerful than Office 97?
Hm, is it? I've never noticed, I guess I just don't
have the need for the more powerful parts of it.
>You even haven't known what we are discussing and what I would commit.
>Actually my patches has little relationship to C++.
What many C++ programmers don't realize is that
lots of the C++ functionality (inheritance etc.)
can be done in C almost as good and easy (and
sometimes just as good and easy). And it's done, and
people have pointed it out.
There are some things in C++ that really are a great
advantage over C (STL, for an easy example) but these
tend to be pretty heavyweight to put them into the
Then again, there are things in C++ that are very
convenient and lightweight. One of them would be
the automatic calling of destructors when exiting
a block. Makes the tracking of the locks much easier.
I'm not so sure that the exceptions get into this
More information about the freebsd-hackers