3 ms·
>We should learn from history of systems programming languages. None of them survived without being tied to a specific OS. How do you define systems programmin
by fauigerzigerk 11y ago
>We should learn from history of systems programming languages. None of them survived without being tied to a specific OS.
How do you define systems programming? If you define it as writing operating systems then your statement is a bit of a tautology. If you define it as anything other than applications programming then I would say there are successful languages not tied to a specific OS, first and foremost Java.
- pjmlp 11y agoAny language capable of writing drivers, boot sectors...
- kazinator 11y agoSystems programming is the locus of development which spans boot firmware, operating system kernels, drivers, utilities and high performance middleware (API's to the operating system, numeric libraries/codecs, graphics, and whatever.) Systems programming languages are characterized by requiring minimal run-time support, or supporting a version of themselves which is that way (e.g. ISO C has the concept of a "freestanding implementation", and there is a way for such a thing to be conforming). As a rule of thumb, if it has no "freestanding implementation" or equivalent, then it's not a systems language. I'm not aware that a flavor of Java exists with a toolchain that would let us rewrite U-Boot in Java, while keeping its footprint in the same ballpark. (I.e. the firmware image cannot contain an entire Java platform.)
- nitrogen 11y agoCould gcj produce suitable native code?
- GFK_of_xmaspast 11y agoI feel like that's an overly-aggressive definition of 'systems language.'