bad_luck

I'm curious what kind of use case you have in mind for this OS you're envisioning. I'll admit I can't really figure out either what you're trying to describe.

Maybe an analogy to explain myself.

Cars were invented for people with sufficient use of their limbs and eyesight. After their invention, the control systems were adapted for people who, for instance, can't use their legs. I don't know of any way they have been adapted for e.g. blind people. And yet, even though they are not accessible to a large fraction of disabled people, the world is better off with cars, designed for not-disabled people and then adapted as far as possible, than without cars.

That's all I'm getting at. Its too much of a constraint on invention, but likely to be adaptable later.

I heard from an earlier posting of this link that he got overwhelmed by driver support. I forget if he dropped it entirely.

> accessible to people with various disabilities

I agree that's important, but I don't think that a great OS should become just a good OS in pursuit of that goal. After the OS is made, it seems like there would absolutely be ways to make the system accessible as-needed.

There is something called kona, I believe, but one of the best things about kdb/q is the speed and I've never seen comparative benchmarks.