On Sat, 21 Oct 2000, Eray Ozkural wrote:
> Rik van Riel wrote:
> > If C++ really is that good for kernel modules, I'd like to
> > see some code that proves it can be done without too much
> > of a performance hit (or without a performance hit at all?).
>
> it can be done in theory :)
I guess I'll have to quote Larry McVoy here ...
"In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice
they are not."
> > Sending 500 rants to the kernel list isn't even close to
> > being productive. Sending 1 patch is...
>
> i already made that point. the only proof that it can
> be done is the demonstration of an actual kernel module
> without a grave performance hit.
*nod*
If there is anybody around who seriously believes C++ would
be a good language for kernel modules, consider this a
challange to show us that this is the case.
I'm willing to look at code and/or benchmark numbers showing
that you people are right, but assertions that nobody backs
up with code go into /dev/null pretty quickly...
cheers,
Rik
--
"What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!"
-- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 23 2000 - 21:00:18 EST