--- "Eray Ozkural (exa)" <email@example.com>
> Well he said performance is not really an issue, but
> is one thing that linux people have been bashing
> hurd with.
> Performance has always been a primary design
> objective in OS
Well don't you assume that the performance in HURD
cannot be increased.Some effort is required than just
> But wait a minute. My god, you intend to turn emacs
> really an operating system now. That's scary. ;)
I don't think there is any need discussing this
further , may be you can stick with a language, others
> You know, both solaris kernel and win2k kernel are
Practically the way it has grown, the the modularity
is of little use I guess as far as MS is concerned.
> In fact, the win2k kernel _is_ a
> design so you could say that it's really similar to
Theoritically may be it started that way but
ultimately can you really compare it to HURD?
Their microkernel itself has bloted to a big extent
which kills it's purpose.
> Anyway, those
> people have been there'n' done that, and AFAIK they
> aren't trying to
> facilitate a multi-language development for their
> kernels, why not?
Come on let's not bring in Billy here.Ok you can be
happy coding in VB thro'out.
> In my opinion, you have persuasive arguments that
> implementation can have good performance. I'm not
> persuaded by them though, because I try to reckon
> the distributed
> case which I believe might not be very good with
Any better alternatives you have??:-)
> On the other hand, reliability and development costs
> may be
> more serious, especially the development cost.
Yes effort is required!!!But didn't quite understand
you on reliablity??
Inspired by GNU
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/