In C# or C++ we have objects, instances of classes that are live in memory. The kernel also has objects, like interrupt objects. I wondered if these kernel objects can be thought of as we C# or C++ programmers objects?
Share
Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
In C# or C++ we have objects, instances of classes that are live in memory. The kernel also has objects, like interrupt objects. I wondered if these kernel objects can be thought of as we C# or C++ programmers objects?
I think this should be tagged as subjective as the answers are going to vary and reflect the individual’s personal view of things.
My take is this…
When you are talking about low-level stuff, sometimes, it is easier to bring in the perspective of OOP into it, to make it easier to communicate the concepts of what happens in the kernel level
…but…
I’d rather prefer to talk in terms of low-level nuts and bolts rather, because the complexity of the nuts and bolts can be easily solved by hammering it out, rather than talking and thinking in terms of objects because it is contriving and making a complex thing sound simple and setting yourself up for false thinking in terms of code economy.
For an example, from a kernel viewpoint, a TSS (Task State Segment) is a structure for holding the registers at the point before a task switch takes place (this is based on the processor being switched to 32bit and has paging enabled and so on). If you talk in terms of OOP aspect, i.e. a task selector object, that would not sound right because you’re talking about a high level aspect when really, it is an actual nuts and bolts, take a look at the Intel 80386 programmer’s manual, and there are references to the TSS, Chapter 13 – Protected-Mode Multitasking, Section 13.1 in the document 24143004.pdf available for download here
If you are talking high-level, from a high-level programming aspect, then it would be easier to define the OOP paradigm.
So, going back to your question, from a kernel aspect, you can if you wish, talk from a simplistic and concrete OOP terms, nonetheless, it would make you think in terms of having to put extra effort into coding in order to follow the OOP paradigm which may or could end up with convoluted code.