On Sunday, May 9, 2021 at 3:40:52 AM UTC-4 Uli Kunitz wrote:
>
> I have only read about researchers who wrote a whole kernel in Go.
>
> UIi
>
The benefits and costs of writing a POSIX kernel in a high-level language
Cody Cutler, M. Frans Kaashoek, and Robert T. Morris, MIT CSAIL
https://www.usen
Thanks Uli and Amnon.
I'm now better understand the reason behinds, and you've list some solid
point. and it's reasonable for it to work that way.
I'm here just list some possibilities:
> 1. * Go requires a garbage collector and its own scheduler (A Go without
GC and goroutines is not Go.)
> 2
I would agree with all Uli's points.
I would add that not that many kernel developers - around 15,000
and most of these just write device drivers.
So kernel development is very much a niche occupation.
C as a very low level language - basically a pretty assembler, with no
runtime, is ideally suit
There are multiple differences that make Rust a better replacement for
C/C++ code than Go:
* Go requires a garbage collector and its own scheduler (A Go without GC
and goroutines is not Go.)
* Go has its own ABI and CGO calls are slow
* Rust makes guarantees about memory safety that Go doesn't d
