Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 2nd May 2007 22:55 UTC
Permalink for comment 236900
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-06-12
It is my impression that C is still the best language for implementing an operating system. For one, we created HelenOS in C and a bit of assembly. However, one of our developers is now working on a research project in which he implements parts of HelenOS in Objective C. His research area is componentization of the operating system. The object oriented language can be also used to implement some operating system constructs more straightforwardly (e.g. virtual methods) than it would be possible in plain C. As for performance loss, according to Martin's experimentation and measurements, it is almost negligible. With ObjC, you need to supply the kernel with a small ObjC runtime code. In case of C++, this runtime would be a bit bigger.
But again, there is nothing you couldn't achieve in C which you could in other languages. So I think using a different language can make your code more expressive and straightforward but will not bring more research into your OS.
Sadly and no offence here, I also feel that the idea of writing an operating system in a non-C language, especially in an object oriented language, has become sort of a cliche.