Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 20:18:44 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: rcoleman@criticalmagic.com Cc: rwatson@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: devd Message-ID: <20050620.201844.39131299.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <42B75C7D.2050103@criticalmagic.com> References: <20050619012425.L56734@fledge.watson.org> <20050620.124905.35871665.imp@bsdimp.com> <42B75C7D.2050103@criticalmagic.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <42B75C7D.2050103@criticalmagic.com>
Richard Coleman <rcoleman@criticalmagic.com> writes:
: M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > devd won't be rewritten to not use C++. That's a non-option.
: >
: > Warner
:
: Out of curiosity, why is that? I have nothing against C++, but that
: stance seems surprising. I have not scanned the tree, but I was under
: the impression that very little of the base system that is written in C++.
Because I wrote it, and I don't like stupid reasons to dictate a
choice of language. It will remain C++ because I'm a grumpy old man,
and I feel that rewriting it to get around the bogosities of the build
system is wrong headed.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050620.201844.39131299.imp>