Re: multi/tasking/processing

[rideau@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Francois-Rene Rideau)]

> Francois-Rene Rideau:
>       Nano- or Micro-, they are the same. The principle of a kernel
>    itself is deeply broken. What is a kernel ? Just some overhead to
>    dispatch routines at run-time. It just has no point. Code should be
>    bound whenever the binding is known, not before (not possible!),
>    not after (and at least, just once, not once per call).
> 
> Er.. how do you re-use resources used infrequently by processes?
   What is the problem ? The same way as you always did, or any way
you like ! I do not see why you need a kernel to do that. Sure you
need resource managers and (dynamic) linkers, but I see no point at
a run-time dispatch center (well, until the 70s, dynamic linking
was too memory hungry, so a kernel was necessary).

> Systems which require the programmer to manage these sorts of
> efficiency constraints are nice and fast when properly tuned, but
> they're painfully clunky until then.
   Why should the programmer manage the details of enforcing those
constraints ? That calls be inlined does not mean that the programmer
should do it manually ! Have you ever heard about a linker ?
About a compiler ?

> And, when that time comes, question your fixed assumptions.
I may return this remark to you, as well as to most of the computing world.

--    ,        	                                ,           _ v    ~  ^  --
-- Fare -- rideau@clipper.ens.fr -- Francois-Rene Rideau -- +)ang-Vu Ban --
--                                      '                   / .          --
Join the TUNES project for a computing system based on computing freedom !
		   TUNES is a Useful, Not Expedient System
WWW page at URL: "http://www.eleves.ens.fr:8080/home/rideau/Tunes/";