From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ironclad, the hard-Real Time capable POSIX-like kernel written in SPARK/Ada, received an nlnet grant Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2024 23:48:34 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2024 01:48:35 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7b8f76882c2a47de8eae1b7c16ac24d2"; logging-data="1486849"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Jc1FtahsFTxzmzicXleL6" User-Agent: Pan/0.160 (Toresk; ) Cancel-Lock: sha1:z1R8ie7/a2MsrJMrfBPZ+jr2TsI= Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:66417 List-Id: On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 00:02:34 +0100, Luke A. Guest wrote: > On 06/10/2024 22:30, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> >> On Sun, 6 Oct 2024 20:46:16 +0100, Luke A. Guest wrote: >> >>> MacOS uses Mach which is well known for being a terrible >>> implementation of the microkernel, that's why it's a hybrid, same >>> reason NT got changed into a hybrid too. >> >> And yet they are both still outperformed by Linux on the same hardware. > > What's your point? I said Mach is the worst example of a microkernel, > it's been proven, decades ago. So where is there a better one? It’s long been established that microkernel performance is terrible, and the theoretical reliability advantages have failed to materialize. What reason is there left to use them? None. After 40 or more years trying to tout the idea, it’s time to give up.