Re: AuroraUX Combines SunOS with Ada

[Ivan Levashew <octagram@bluebottle.com>]

anon wrote:

> No virtual machine! All VM are only as good as the host OS.  And if a problem 
> exist in the host OS then those errors will be magnified in the VM. And a true 
> Ada OS would never work in a VM environment, the Ada OS must be the 
> "New Law Giver". The only VM that would be allowed is for processor sizing 
> programs, such as 16, 32, 64, 128 and may be even 256 bit programs.

OK, let it be not VM but a compiler that can recompile every dependent 
package on demand. Is it a viable solution?

>                        
> And if you do a little studying you will see that almost every language 
> including COBOL has been used for a 100% language version OS.  Should Ada 
> be denied the respect to try to prove itself for using 100% language OS? 
> The answer is "NO"!
> 
Do you mean desktop OS? Desktop OS needs several freedoms that Ada won't 
provide for free.

> One weakness of these language based OS is the needs to operate in a safe 
> mission critical matter.  The only language that has that attribute built-in is 
> "Ada". So, why 100% Ada, well injecting other languages like C, or Pascal 
> could prevent the OS from being a true safe mission critical OS. And just 
> converting programs or projects to Ada mean that the safe mission critical 
> design can not be guarantee either because it might be the API that is not 
> secure.
> 
There are MaRTE and PaRTiKle for mission critical tasks.

> So, now why are you so against using 100% Ada to building an OS.

Did you noticed there is no 100% C++ desktop OS despite C++ fans all around.

> 
> Everybody knows that the new "Windows 7" will not be prefect. But are the 
> errors embedded so that Microsoft can come out with the next OS version in 3 
> years. Or has Microsoft been too cheap in hiring it labor force (programmers 
> and testers) to create the new "Windows 7". Or will you find some of the 
> fault in the languages that Microsoft used in building "Windows 7".  Only 
> time will tell us! Plus, the first reason is illegal.
> 
Microsoft is a mere seller. Consumer governs the world. If consumer 
never minds paying for C++ programs (and is proud of paying for C++ 
programs), consumer is the one to blame.

-- 
If you want to get to the top, you have to start at the bottom