On 26 Jun 2013, at 12:25, Vasileios Anagnostopoulos <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 6/25/2013 12:28 PM, David Chisnall wrote: >> On 25 Jun 2013, at 09:50, "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I find this interesting from a theoretical / structureal point of view, but >>> why do you want to run any code in the kernel space? >> Because we can :-) > Isn't this experiment already done in IOKit with C++? No. >> >>> Do you expect a performance benefit or more security (I would expect less)? >> Things interacting with the kernel subsystems directly would be faster than >> if they needed round trips to userspace. Things written in higher-level >> languages should (in theory) be more reliable. It's about finding >> additional places on the spectrum between performance and reliability. >> >>> Or would any kernel component become easier to develop or test? > I would expect a great reduction in LOCs. Maybe, although it's not clear what the improvement just from Objective-C would be. The kernel already includes an ad-hoc vtable-based object model and some C macros for creating classes / instances / methods. Bridging this with an object model that supports duck typing is quite an interesting research problem... >> We'll find out. It's not research if you know all of the answers up-front... > For me it would make much more sense to go with XNU and convert the IOKit to > Objective C too. IOKit replaces DriverKit, which was the NeXT framework for device drivers, which was written in Objective-C... David _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
