On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Nicholas Leippe wrote:
>
> I agree with Jose--let the features used be chosen on technical merit, not
> just somebody's whim. Imo, it is far too premature to just discard this or
> that feature of C++.
If people decide to go with C++ (which I don't disagree with per se),
please keep in mind that most people will use gcc for XFree86, and worry
more about specific gcc issues and performance than about abstract issues.
Also, keep in mind that at both an upper _and_ a lower level you will end
up having to integrate with C anyway.
In particular, avoid overly virtual code (horrible performance if you have
dynamic casts etc) and exceptions (bad code generation, and a fundamental
inability to work with high-performance C code).
But templates are potentially a great idea, since that is something that
is easily very ugly in C (realize that the DRM(xxx)() thing with type
defines etc for the kernel is nothign but a C template implementation.
It's certainly not very readable, but it's better than the alternatives,
and C++ is not an option in most kernels).
Also note that if you don't allow exceptions (which I would _strongly_
encourage), you can't really use "new" - unless you think it's ok to
SIGSEGV under low-mem circumstances. Which it might be, of course, in some
situations.
Linus
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The debugger
for complex code. Debugging C/C++ programs can leave you feeling lost and
disoriented. TotalView can help you find your way. Available on major UNIX
and Linux platforms. Try it free. www.etnus.com
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
