Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 12th Jun 2006 13:29 UTC, submitted by david
Permalink for comment 132786
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-04-04
I think there's a few factors here.
First is that kernel developers feel comfortable with C. C++ is a multi-paradigm language and when you have other developers starting to write crazy templates, or insanse object hierarchies, other people aren't going to appreciate their way of thinking.
C is simple. You've got macros, structures, and functions. That's it. There's much less room for "creative" types that want to inject wacky way of doing things.
There's no reason you can't write a successful, tight kernel in C++. It's just that it would probably work better with a tight knit group of developers, and not the freestyle of the linux kernel.