Re:Why not port Linux kernel to Common Lisp?
by wglb on Saturday December 05, 2009 @12:26PM
(#978270)
The suggested gains (transparency, mostly) would not really be achieved, I think, because even if you get an 8:1 reduction in line count, it will still not look very transparent. It is still a very complicated problem.
And even if the performance of lisp approaches hand-crafted C, there will still be
More interesting is to design a different OS based on lisp using today's hardware. But what would you want it to do differently than Linux?
Re:Why not port Linux kernel to Common Lisp?
by thwarted on Sunday December 06, 2009 @06:01PM
(#980308)
This is a refreshing change from the "The Linux kernel should use C++ more" that crops up every so often.
Despite it's refreshingness, it's still tiring to see these kinds of questions/goals. The Linux kernel is written what it is written in, by the people who wrote it. If you think it's a worthwhile thing to have it written in something else, patches will be entertained, and baring that, forks are acceptable.
And even if the performance of lisp approaches hand-crafted C, there will still be
More interesting is to design a different OS based on lisp using today's hardware. But what would you want it to do differently than Linux?
Despite it's refreshingness, it's still tiring to see these kinds of questions/goals. The Linux kernel is written what it is written in, by the people who wrote it. If you think it's a worthwhile thing to have it written in something else, patches will be entertained, and baring that, forks are acceptable.