Moving the kernel to modern C

Posted Feb 25, 2022 14:52 UTC (Fri) by jd (guest, #26381)
In reply to: Moving the kernel to modern C by ncm
Parent article: Moving the kernel to modern C

If we aren't going to go with ancient, then move to D. It's much, much newer and doesn't carry anything like the risks or overheads of C++. (Not that I'd recommend it, for other reasons, but it helps illustrate the age of the standard shouldn't matter as much as the quality of the result.)

Is there markup for any of the static checkers beloved by kernel developers that could be used to improve the quality of the results? (And when was the last time Coverity checked the kernel?)

There must be plenty that could be done to improve the kernel code without a drastic change of language.

Moving the kernel to modern C

Posted Feb 25, 2022 18:04 UTC (Fri) by davej (subscriber, #354) [Link] (1 responses)

> And when was the last time Coverity checked the kernel

99% of the time, the answer to this question is the same as "when did Linus last cut an -rc/final".
I usually kick off a run the same day, failing that the following morning.

Moving the kernel to modern C

Posted Feb 28, 2022 18:38 UTC (Mon) by jd (guest, #26381) [Link]

That's very comforting to know. I don't know how much it is picking up these days, but I've been haunting the fringes long enough to know that it has always provided a very important service to kernel developers. (Through the mead haze, I can dimly recall when it was first used.)

Moving the kernel to modern C

Posted Feb 25, 2022 21:33 UTC (Fri) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link]

I doubt Coverity works on D code. It does work on C++. "Risks and overheads" is wholesale speculation, unwelcome here.