kern/99979: Get Ready for Kernel Module in C++

[David Nugent]

Matthias Andree wrote:
>> 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).
>   
libstdc++ would not be used, just as userland libc isn't.

There is a spec for embedded C++, and it is certainly appropriate to 
kernel level development. Many parts of the language that require 
runtime support can be dropped with impunity; for example most embedded 
environments don't include for exceptions , rtti, many don't support 
objects at module scope with constructors/destructors, and so on.

C++ itself is quite usable in an embedded environment, but you don't 
(and should not expect) to get the complete feature list of the 
mainstream language.