Not "mine"; the issue of everyone who does not want C++

> then luckily it's a non-issue.

Must feel good to be right when so many people are wrong :-)

> my point is that for this feature, C++ is a better tool than C with non-standard extensions.

Yes! But: see above.

> Discussions which C++ features are allowed in the kernel is no different than any other coding style discussion.

Qualitatively yes. Quantitatively no. I know: I don't have any metrics to show you; these things are very hard to measure. But you don't have any either and the consensus / educated guess in Linux (and some other projects) is that the trade-off is not worth it. That is of course based on observations in other, actual C++ projects, I mean the lack of metrics does not mean it's based on thin air either.

BTW: which features are allowed is IMHO a small part of code style discussions. A very important part of course, maybe the most important one but small in "email volume". I'm just saying "code style" is not a great choice of words here, never mind.

> That's a straw man. Let's discuss the language rather than discussing theoretical arguments from hypothetical C++ fanboys

Oh come on: "you're holding it wrong" is the typical answer of _every_, _real_ C++ fanboy! Very vocal and hopefully not representative as usual on the Internet but certainly not "hypothetical".

> I know very well that C++ is hard, and I admit it's a complex mess of a language.

Thank you!