linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/45] C++: Convert the kernel to C++

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <938ebce3-74c5-4fcf-9de3-849271d3581d@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 09:58:54 +0100
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pinskia@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/45] C++: Convert the kernel to C++

Hi,

On 09. 01. 24, 20:57, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> What really makes me say that is that a lot of things we have recently 
> asked for gcc-specific extensions are in fact relatively easy to 
> implement in standard C++ and, in many cases, allows for infrastructure 
> improvement *without* global code changes (see below.)
> 
> C++14 is in my option the "minimum" version that has reasonable 
> metaprogramming support has most of it without the type hell of earlier 
> versions (C++11 had most of it, but C++14 fills in some key missing 
> pieces).

If you mean it, I do too. So I can only express my +1: yes, please.

I don't have much to add as you summarized most of it.

thanks,
-- 
js
suse labs