On 09/02/2025(Tue) 01:15
Bruce Perens <bruce@???> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 4:22 PM David Niklas via Dng <dng@???>
> wrote:
> > Why not use Python, Ruby, Pascal, SH, etc., in the Linux kernel if you
> > want memory safety?
> >
>
> I'm afraid you are missing really critical points about what makes a
> language suitable for kernel development.
> The most important is the ability to deal directly and efficiently with
> memory-mapped hardware. You need to catch
> up upon this before seriously joining this sort of discussion.
<snip>

And do you know how much they have to change rust to make it work for
kernel development?
https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/issues/2

If they can bend the language and bend the Linux Kernel for rust, they
can, at least theoretically, do it for other programming languages too.


> > In fact, Linus Torvalds himself said he did not want object oriented
> > C++ code in the Linux Kernel.
> The reasons were that C++ did not add much value to kernel programming,
> and many of its library constructs were better suited to application
> programming than embedded, real-time, or kernel because they made
> frequent and essentially unbounded use of dynamically-allocated memory.
<snip>
If C++ were impossible to use or "did not add value," then I would argue
that Windowz's kernel would not be partially written in it.

"The Windows kernel is written in C and C++..."
https://library.mosse-institute.com/articles/2022/12/windows-internals-windows-kernel-part-1.html

David