William ML Leslie writes:
> I wasn't talking about things that are now features of GNU/Linux,
> rather things anyone should probably consider doing differently in
> hurd-ng; like safe languages for essential features and better support
> for asynchronity.
Speaking safe languages, are you proposing another language like Rust to
replace C? I think it's interesting to write another Hurdish kernel with
Rust, but I still don't know if it could be accepted as a side-project of Hurd.
Rust is one option. But remember that the Hurd is not a kernel, it is user-space implementation of functionality that has typically lived in the kernel. For the sake of both security and ease of development, critical parts could be written in rust (or ATS, or Nim), and less critical parts in guile or so.
Anyway, it's using name mangling like C++ which is bad for FFI (foreign
function interface) to bind dynamic languages. I ever thought to write a
thing like cl-Hurd with Guile.
We learned a lot from Arne's python bindings. Add language binding to the list of priorities that should be higher.