Hello chaps :) I just saw this on the net about a new OS from M$ called Singularity. What do you think of it thus far? http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/174267/microsoft-releases-robust-new-operating-system.html
<DELURK> "The OS is coded in an extension of C# - rather than more simple C or C++ - to avoid the flaws of today's operating systems, such as their susceptibility to buffer overruns from worms or viruses." Hahahahahahahahahaha! I needed that laugh. <LURK>
I wonder if anyone actually took a look to the code before opening his/her mouth. Note that I don't trust Microsoft either, but giving that Singularity is not planned to be a successor to Windows, but a research experiment, makes me think it _can_ be good.
And what does this crap have to do with OpenBSD? Ah, yesss, it's TROLL NOISE. Rod/ "Write a wise saying and your name will live on forever." - Anonymous
Having a kernel with managed code is not necessarily idiotic (although I think in most cases smart pointers do the job better). However having chosen C# is in my opinion not optimal. C# is very limited when it comes to generic and meta-programming. I think "modern-styled" C++ (ie template intensive) and a functional oriented language would have been a better choice for a secure OS built from the ground up.
Have you ever been involved in OS design and implementation? And I do not mean academic exercises, but a real world project producing actual working stuff. -Otto
I don't think it is relevant or even polite to question one's abilities when discussing technical matters.
Point is that C++ is retarded.
You state an opinion without backing it up by referring to either existing projects or by personal experience. I do not know any succesful project using "template style C++" and functional languges for OS development, so I'm asking if you have any experience using these for OS develpment.
I have studied it and used it on many projects. I never got used to dealing with its inherent flaws. It is a language that always has a If it doesn't have buffer overflows it means you did a good job writing your code. C++ doesn't get any cookies. Are you sure that all the garbage you linked against also doesn't have What you really are saying is that magic happens behind the scenes. If you are ok with trusting the compiler to do all that stuff right then I guess that would be a good thing. Considering the quality of gcc I'll I call malarkey on all this. I have to this day see C++ re-use. Honestly the only useful application I have ever seen for C++ is to encapsulate windows calls. Borland did an amazing job with RTL. I would never ever even dare to think about using any of that stuff in kernel code though. The other things you mentioned are straight from the marketing
Are you sure you used the STL? http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/driver/kernel/KMcode.mspx Read the section about "Libraries": "Although much of the Standard Template Library is implemented as source code in headers, it occasionally uses library functions or other features that are not available or usable in the kernel environment." I'm guessing you must have had to do some serious mangling of the STL in order to shoehorn it into your driver. Sounds like far more trouble than it's worth. -ml
The comment from Microsoft is correct. Basically you need to remove exceptions support and write custom allocators. I have been unsucessful with the Microsoft STL, I therefore used STLPort. The problem with the provided STL headers is that there is a #define nightmare for C++/CLI compatibility. I think we are drafting toward OT...
http://www.jnode.org/ has been around for a while and if you search sf.net for "+java +operating +system" http://sourceforge.net/search/?words=%2Bjava+%2Bos&type_of_search=soft&pmode=0... you get 86 results. So the C# version was bound to follow. And as far as I can remember there is an open source effort to write a c#, can't remember the name though. Cheers Didi ---- www.cern.ch/ribalba / www.ribalba.de Email / Jabber: email@example.com Phone (Work) : +41 22 7679376 Skype : ribalba Address : CERN / IT-FIO-FS / GENEVE 23/ SCHWEIZ
Love the marketing lingo "managed code". I am sure we can move some I don't think I could come up with a more awkward language than C++. It is too generic where it should be specific and too specific where it should be generic. I marvel at how bad the language is designed and by the sheer fact that it has ++ in it that made the marketing departments go wild.
Perhaps we should review the Ada thread from a while back. Doug.
Can't wait to see it's incredible success at being an OS. Ever wondered why your cell phone OS sucks?
Are you living in 2001? It should be in Ruby on Rails.
On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Steve Shockley <firstname.lastname@example.org> No, the OS should be written in silverlight. -- http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk "This officer's men seem to follow him merely out of idle curiosity." -- Sandhurst officer cadet evaluation. "Securing an environment of Windows platforms from abuse - external or internal - is akin to trying to install sprinklers in a fireworks factory where smoking on the job is permitted." -- Gene Spafford learn french: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1G-3laJJP0&feature=related
Unununium.org -- Jonathan
"Sun now officially considers JavaOS a legacy system <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_system> and recommends migration to Java ME <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_ME> ^ <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaOS#_note-0> . This by itself however is not a full replacement, as Java ME is an API <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/API> specification, which runs on top of an operating system, and is not an operating system in itself." I may be mistaken but if they relegate this to the rank of a "legacy system" instead of improving it and giving more credit to their language, it must mean something about the use of their language to design a system. Gilles
They relegated it to "legacy system" status because there wasn't a market for it. Java ME targets the embedded systems market and does it quite well. Embedded systems developers typically have used a fixed set of OSes, Sun considered it not worthwhile to introduce one more standard, and instead focused on delivering a platform for application development.
Thank God someone is writing an OS with dependability and security in mind. Erik