3 ms·

I am quite ignorant about how these systems actually worked. I have heard of Lisp Machines before; the Alto and Lilith seem similar in that they're purpose-buil

I am quite ignorant about how these systems actually worked. I have heard of Lisp Machines before; the Alto and Lilith seem similar in that they're purpose-built hardware focused on running particular languages (or families of languages). The others are kind of hard to find relevant information about. My cursory understanding of these environments is that the hardware did a lot "more" than modern micros and so the system software could enjoy many luxuries that a typical modern operating system has to build for itself. They also didn't work well with languages they weren't designed for.

pjmlp 2y ago
Doesn't change the fact that they were full stack OS experiences written in those languages, covering most scenarios that everyone keeps claiming only C can do. The way they ended up not gaining traction had more to do with management decisions, company acquisitions and hardware costs, than the technology stacks themselves. The "C" for systems programming isn't only pure C as defined by K&R C, or ANSI/ISO C, rather C + Assembly, or compiler specific extensions for inline Assembly, pragmas, intrinsics, and keywords not part of any standard. D and C# are two modern examples of GC based languages with similar capabilities in intrinsics.
- kbolino 2y ago
  I think with modern hardware you could significantly reduce the amount of C code but I'm not sure you could eliminate it entirely. Rust is trying to do just that but IMO isn't really comparable to the languages you mentioned. Maybe if microkernels had taken off and/or hardware drivers were written with more abstract interfaces, things might have been different even on the much cheaper hardware that won out.
  - pjmlp 2y ago
    There are plenty of OS written in C++, already that is an improvement over bare bones C. For example, Meadow uses a C++ mikrokernel, with everything else written in C#. https://www.wildernesslabs.co/ https://www.wildernesslabs.co/
    - kbolino 2y ago
      I'd be surprised if they can use all of C++'s advantages in a freestanding environment. Even Rust struggles there though at least it's a first-class option.
  - yencabulator 2y ago
    > significantly reduce the amount of C code but I'm not sure you could eliminate it entirely Theseus is a research OS written in Rust that seems to include C purely to show how to support programs written in C (libc and a demo app). https://github.com/theseus-os/Theseus https://github.com/theseus-os/Theseus It contains some 1000+ lines of ASM for the early boot from BIOS, that look like they originate from https://os.phil-opp.com/minimal-rust-kernel/ https://os.phil-opp.com/minimal-rust-kernel/ -- I think UEFI boot would have been doable in pure Rust (https://github.com/rust-osdev/uefi-rs https://github.com/rust-osdev/uefi-rs).
    - kbolino 2y ago
      Rust certainly provides much stronger guarantees than C, though some of its features aren't available (or at least don't come batteries included) in a freestanding (no_std) environment. The borrow checker is also a lot less forgiving than a garbage collector.

pjmlp 2y ago

Doesn't change the fact that they were full stack OS experiences written in those languages, covering most scenarios that everyone keeps claiming only C can do. The way they ended up not gaining traction had more to do with management decisions, company acquisitions and hardware costs, than the technology stacks themselves. The "C" for systems programming isn't only pure C as defined by K&R C, or ANSI/ISO C, rather C + Assembly, or compiler specific extensions for inline Assembly, pragmas, intrinsics, and keywords not part of any standard. D and C# are two modern examples of GC based languages with similar capabilities in intrinsics.

kbolino 2y ago
I think with modern hardware you could significantly reduce the amount of C code but I'm not sure you could eliminate it entirely. Rust is trying to do just that but IMO isn't really comparable to the languages you mentioned. Maybe if microkernels had taken off and/or hardware drivers were written with more abstract interfaces, things might have been different even on the much cheaper hardware that won out.
- pjmlp 2y ago
  There are plenty of OS written in C++, already that is an improvement over bare bones C. For example, Meadow uses a C++ mikrokernel, with everything else written in C#. https://www.wildernesslabs.co/ https://www.wildernesslabs.co/
  - kbolino 2y ago
    I'd be surprised if they can use all of C++'s advantages in a freestanding environment. Even Rust struggles there though at least it's a first-class option.
- yencabulator 2y ago
  > significantly reduce the amount of C code but I'm not sure you could eliminate it entirely Theseus is a research OS written in Rust that seems to include C purely to show how to support programs written in C (libc and a demo app). https://github.com/theseus-os/Theseus https://github.com/theseus-os/Theseus It contains some 1000+ lines of ASM for the early boot from BIOS, that look like they originate from https://os.phil-opp.com/minimal-rust-kernel/ https://os.phil-opp.com/minimal-rust-kernel/ -- I think UEFI boot would have been doable in pure Rust (https://github.com/rust-osdev/uefi-rs https://github.com/rust-osdev/uefi-rs).
  - kbolino 2y ago
    Rust certainly provides much stronger guarantees than C, though some of its features aren't available (or at least don't come batteries included) in a freestanding (no_std) environment. The borrow checker is also a lot less forgiving than a garbage collector.