Linked by subterrific on Mon 9th Jan 2017 22:25 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes

Rux's goal is to become a safe general-purpose microkernel. It tries to take advantage of Rust's memory model - ownership and lifetime. While the kernel will be small, unsafe code should be kept minimal. This makes updating functionalities of the kernel hassle-free.

Rux uses a design that is similar to seL4. While there won't be formal verification in the short term, it tries to address some design issues of seL4, for example, capability allocation.

The code is very approachable for anyone interested in capability-based microkernel design.

Thread beginning with comment 639502
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
kwan_e
Member since:
2007-02-18

Rust could be what Ada once was, only with the distinction of preexisting hobbyist buy-in.


I think Ada still is. It's just not "sexy".

Ada is old and crusty so it only gets used for serious stuff and stuff that needs to be supported whatever the cost.

Rust is new and part of the culture of creating something from scratch every time design mistakes catch up to them but they don't want to do the real engineering work when it does, opting to repeat other people's mistakes by starting over again. But then, you did say "hobbyist" already ;)

Hobbyist buy-in is like an oxymoron.

Reply Parent Score: 4

cb88 Member since:
2009-04-23

Without the hobbyists you have no developer pool to draw from... thus Ada is developed at "whatever the cost" expenses.

Reply Parent Score: 3

kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

It's the psychological profile of the hobbyists that matter. A language like Ada that has relatively few hobbyists because it isn't sexy is not that much different from a language fully of fad-hopping hobbyists who will abandon ship when they realize the language they thought solved their pet peeve has developed something else to peeve them off in its stead.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

kwan_e,

Rust is new and part of the culture of creating something from scratch every time design mistakes catch up to them but they don't want to do the real engineering work when it does, opting to repeat other people's mistakes by starting over again. But then, you did say "hobbyist" already



Yes and no. It's really not like new languages are developed in a vacuum, they clearly benefit from experience with languages that preceded them. In other words, today's developers have the benefit of hindsight and can consciously fix many of the issues where C/C++ are criticized, such as cruft, safety and bad compilation times with large projects. So we shouldn't be making the same mistakes that have been made in the past.

But the possibility still exists that we are making new mistakes with new languages, and I think those would be well worth talking about. Do you have anything specific in mind?

Edited 2017-01-10 16:11 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

today's developers have the benefit of hindsight and can consciously fix many of the issues where C/C++ are criticized over cruft and lack of safety. So we shouldn't be making the same mistakes that have been made in the past.


It's the way they go about fixing the issues - "oh, we'll just create yet another language" - that is the problem. All languages will develop cruft, and all languages will paint themselves into a corner. The most ideological ones tend to do that the most frequently.

Only a handful of languages are left where the base is committed to using it cruft and all and not just abandon it for the latest fad in language design.

Reply Parent Score: 2

zlynx Member since:
2005-07-20

I think that you may be missing the fact that Rust isn't written by hobbyists. It's written and used primarily by professionals with experience in one of the largest C++ code bases on the planet: Firefox. Firefox is big enough that it requires 64-bit build tools to compile on Windows. And it is popular enough that it is a major target for malicious hacking.

These people know exactly what problems they have and what they're solving.

Being attractive to hobbyists is a nice side benefit.

Reply Parent Score: 2

kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

I think that you may be missing the fact that Rust isn't written by hobbyists. It's written and used primarily by professionals with experience


I don't see why "professionals with experience" can't be hobbyists. I'm not talking about skill level.

Reply Parent Score: 2