To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
No. Using the right algorithm for a problem might be more difficult to program, but if the run time is a fraction of the simple solution, it _might_ be a better solution
The problem is that you forgot a very important parameter : the time it takes to implement the algorithm.
And microkernels lose big time here : longer to implement, longer to make them fast.
I'm no expert, I just look at the hard facts.
Linus uses performance as an argument, but sometimes good performance requires complex solutions
Linux already has very good performance.
The choice of programming language doesn't really have anything to do with design
That's not true at all. There are procedural, functional, OO programming languages. Each one can greatly change the design of your app.
What baffles me here, is that there's no problem. There are just people arguing about which is best.
Unfortunately, one camp has a very good implementation, widely used in all situations you can use a kernel.
The other camp has nearly nothing : only some niche situations. So the other camp can't compare to Linux, just present theorical findings.
So, even if it's just arguments, I have a hard time being on the side of microkernel proponents, because monolithic kernel people have made sth.
In the other camp, I see people badmouthing people making Linux, but I've yet to see all these brilliant people working on the Hurd.
Go help these people to validate your theories, instead of losing your time arguing with Linus, who has nothing to prove anymore.






Member since:
2005-07-07
No. Using the right algorithm for a problem might be more difficult to program, but if the run time is a fraction of the simple solution, it _might_ be a better solution. Linus uses performance as an argument, but sometimes good performance requires complex solutions.
The choice of programming language doesn't really have anything to do with design.