4 ms·

How does this compare with https://github.com/dancrossnyc/rxv64 https://github.com/dancrossnyc/rxv64 ? From its README.md: rxv64 is a pedagogical operating sys

• snvzz 3y ago
  I immediately notice that o8vm targets RISC-V, whereas rxv64 targets a legacy ISA.
  • yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
    Is it really a "legacy" ISA if it's actively developed by two different companies (and will be for a long time to come) and is utterly dominant in servers, desktops, and laptops today?
    • snvzz 3y ago
      You're right in that it is still actively developed by two different companies, and that it is still utterly dominant in servers, desktops, and laptops... today. Perhaps you would prefer "incumbent ISA"? But that would be a pointless exercise, because RISC-V is inevitable, and the new industry standard. The intent was to express "not RISC-V" anyway. The parent already specifies which.
      • yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
        > Perhaps you would prefer "incumbent ISA"? I wouldn't mind that. > But that would be a pointless exercise, because RISC-V is inevitable, and the new industry standard. Er. So even if the second part of the sentence were true, calling out the current leader isn't pointless. And the second part of your claim is very much not a foregone conclusion; RISC-V is a standard, and used by the industry, but it's not in anything like a dominant enough position to call it "the industry standard", and its success is certainly not inevitable - RISC-V is today where MIPS was a decade ago (cheap, modestly popular in embedded, lacking in high-end parts, not popular outside of embedded). Now, its trajectory is upwards, it has enough going for it that it could become extremely popular, and certainly I'd like an Open Source option to win - but that's just one possibility, and history is littered with ISAs that were supposed to be the Next Big Thing.
        • snvzz 3y ago
          >is very much not a foregone conclusion It may very well be by now. RISC-V already has the momentum behind it. The investment is there, and it's huge, both from governments and private. Major design wins. Multiple incoming very high performance implementations from multiple vendors. On the software side, I have never seen a new architecture's software ecosystem grow as quickly as RISC-V's has. >history is littered with ISAs that were supposed to be the Next Big Thing You're well aware how RISC-V is better suited for success. Both technical, and non-technical aspects. It has the mojo. I remember when PowerPC and ARM got their moments. This is an order of magnitude bigger. No ISA has ever managed to rally this much support, broad and wide. It's not even close. I'm telling you: x86 is finally going down. RISC-V is inevitable.
          • cross 3y ago
            Probably true. Porting rxv64 to RISC-V probably wouldn't be that big of a lift, honestly.
          • stockerta 3y ago
            After Rust fanboys, the other annoying ones are Risc-V fanboys.
            • snvzz 3y ago
              RISC-V is inevitable. Why wouldn't you be happy about it?
• o8vm 3y ago
  octox is also different in that the kernel, userland, mkfs, and build system are all implemented in Rust, and I think it is also different at the type level, for example, octox using mpmc for Pipe, and using OnceLock and LazyLock for static variable initialization.
  • bakul 3y ago
    Thanks. rxv64 kernel (the much harder part), syslib and ulib are in rust. Replacing userland C with rust would not be hard. Ideally a general purpose OS should support programs written in any of the common programming languages so it would make sense to have some programs in another language to keep the OS API "honest"!
    • o8vm 3y ago
      octox aims to provide a user library similar to Rust’s std, but implementing it is somewhat difficult.