Anon (no.delete@this.spam.com) on July 14, 2021 4:19 am wrote:
> cqwrteur (euloanty.delete@this.live.com) on July 14, 2021 2:38 am wrote:
> > C++ is not an OO language. If you think C++ is an OO language
> > and people like me who do not use OO are wrong. You are liars.
>
> C++ is object oriented, hey, what do you think object oriented is?

What do you think object oriented is? Just using the keyword "class" is OOP now? LOL.


We are typically talking about "virtual" keyword, which is a very bad keyword. Extremely broken.


Let me emphasis again I do not want C++ in the kernel.

But let's assume linus does allow C++ in the kernel (which is something he will never do.) I guess for people like you, you would just abuse virtual for all translation units.

The downside is:

1. You cannot use virtual. Virtual functions introduce runtimes like __cxa_pure_virtual(), __cxa_delete_virtual(). Guess what, they are designed as user space libsupc++, since Linux does not require you to build a new toolchain, you get a conflict with symbol. (Funny right)
2. Other stuffs like __cxa_new_array,__cxa_new_array2,__cxa_new_array3 whatever are the same issue, which are the issues you are talking about.
3. RTTI also requires runtime.

Of course, the fundamental issue is EH.

You cannot use OOP in kernel. Full stop.