Re: mach deficiencies
>> Speed is IMHO less important than simplicity
>> of design, maintainability of the code base, and stability.
> I don't think the design of Mach is simple. And, as for GNU Mach,
>the maintainability is poor (its code is like spaghetti), and I doubt
>even the stability (because it contains my code :-p).
I wouldn't be so definite about Mach. I like the way it's programmed,
the only problem being that it's ``layered'', with all the people who
worked on it changing the coding style everytime... I think the
introduction of Linux drivers (in Mach4) was the beginning of the end,
because Linux drivers are far uglier than Mach (and are not tailored
for it, that's the least one can say). Maybe, since GNUMach seems to
be in a dead end, we would have less trouble using NetBSD's drivers,
which are much much nicer... and closer to Mach.
Just a thought,