Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th May 2006 21:25 UTC, submitted by luzr
OSNews, Generic OSes Torvalds has indeed chimed in on the micro vs. monolithic kernel debate. Going all 1992, he says: "The whole 'microkernels are simpler' argument is just bull, and it is clearly shown to be bull by the fact that whenever you compare the speed of development of a microkernel and a traditional kernel, the traditional kernel wins. The whole argument that microkernels are somehow 'more secure' or 'more stable' is also total crap. The fact that each individual piece is simple and secure does not make the aggregate either simple or secure. And the argument that you can 'just reload' a failed service and not take the whole system down is equally flawed." My take: While I am not qualified to reply to Linus, there is one thing I want to say: just because it is difficult to program, does not make it the worse design.
Thread beginning with comment 122883
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Zen
by saxiyn on Wed 10th May 2006 00:21 UTC
saxiyn
Member since:
2005-07-08

I have only these lines to quote from the Zen of Python:

If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea.
If the implementation is easy to explain, it may be a good idea.

http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0020/

Reply Score: 3

RE: Zen
by haugland on Wed 10th May 2006 11:35 in reply to "Zen"
haugland Member since:
2005-07-07

Lets just cancel all algorithmics classes then. Why bother with branch-and-bound, if we can just check out all possible solutions to NP-hard problems? And why use merge-sort or quick-sort when insertion-sort is easier to explain?

Reply Parent Score: 2