• Essien Ita Essien (6/6) Dec 06 2004 Can i use D to write a Linux Kernel MOdule?
• Thomas Kuehne (14/20) Dec 07 2004 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
• Ilya Minkov (19/26) Dec 08 2004 I just don't think it may make sense. :)

"Essien Ita Essien" <essiene gmail.com> writes:

Can i use D to write a Linux Kernel MOdule?

If yes, any ideas on how to proceed?

If not why?

I seem to understand (from what i've been seeing around), that D, is closer 
to C than C++ and that its closer to the machine too than C++, so i'm 
wondering, can D, go where no C++ has gone before? 

Thomas Kuehne <thomas-dloop kuehne.thisisspam.cn> writes:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Essien Ita Essien schrieb am Tue, 7 Dec 2004 04:12:46 +0100:
 Can i use D to write a Linux Kernel MOdule?

 If yes, any ideas on how to proceed?

 If not why?

 I seem to understand (from what i've been seeing around), that D, is closer 
 to C than C++ and that its closer to the machine too than C++, so i'm 
 wondering, can D, go where no C++ has gone before? 

The only potential problem that spring to mind is GC.

I know too little about the memory management of LKMs to provide any
decisive answer. 

The next version of gdc is rumored to have a standalone GC implementation...

Thomas

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.9.13 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBtaPA3w+/yD4P9tIRAscSAKDNen8I4BjaI1LUTPk5xTvERauRlQCgqiwv
XsrsA7liImVrlMsfzPtj9xs=
=6e0I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Ilya Minkov <minkov cs.tum.edu> writes:

Essien Ita Essien schrieb:
 Can i use D to write a Linux Kernel MOdule?

Perhaps, but i don't think it's a good idea.

 If yes, any ideas on how to proceed?
 
 If not why?

I just don't think it may make sense. :)

If you don't get a garbage collector working, you loose almost every 
other feature of D. Besides, i don't know the exact implications, but i 
would tend to strictly limit memory usage in a kernel unit, which pretty 
much rules out the usage of Phobos (the D standard library) because it 
uses copy-on-write convention.

 I seem to understand (from what i've been seeing around), that D, is closer 
 to C than C++ and that its closer to the machine too than C++, so i'm 
 wondering, can D, go where no C++ has gone before? 

C++ is an exact superset of C (minus one or two purely syntactic and not 
notable exceptions), and is in principle much more flexible than D. 
There are a few areas where D has potential to beat C++, and these would 
mostly lie when writing large and complex software, and lie mostly in 
manageability, but may also touch large-scale optimization.

If you consider usual programming style, than some areas, like array 
handling, are made in D more transparent and machine-near than usually 
done in C++ with STL. However i would hesitate to make a general 
conclusion from that, because there many examples to the opposite, and 
C++ by itself doesn't force you to use STL.

-eye