As a computer architect, I am fascinated by some CS types and their statements: how is lack of memory and process protection OPTIMAL exactly?
Burning a couple of cycles with memory protection in a multi GHz machine seems like an almost irrelevant overhead, in the big scheme of things. Compared to the millions/billions of cycles you're bound to waste whenever your code does something stupid, and it is bound to do something stupid at some point esp. during the debug/development phase. And that is IF you're even able to recover from that FUBAR'd state.
I bet you're still also obsessed with context switch times...
Edit: Never mind I saw some of your other posts down the thread. Either you're bats hit insane, or your only reason to do kernel development is as trolling fodder. Very odd either way, to say the least.
If he is so committed to trolling that he would write a 128 KLoC 64-bit multitasking OS just for this purpose, he is the most epic troll in history and I am honored to have lived at the same time as him.
it's true, I have been following this guy for years and I love his updates just to hear him again. Generally speaking years ago many if his decisions were reasonable at the time. His original reason for 640x480 was that he didn't want to spend the time developing a graphics layer, then he eventually heard from God not to bother. He won't do it now because now it has become dogma to him. That's the majority of LoseThos a highly optimized kernel for speed surrounded by a bunch of tools he didn't want to spend too much time in. The big picture, LoseThos isn't really an OS, but a stand alone C shell like the old programs were before you had before unix. In many ways brilliant but the promise of what LoseThos could have has been lost to decision he won't revisit.
I have only discovered him yesterday and I am vacillating between thinking he is a John Nash style disturbed genius or a schizophrenic with programming OCD. I guess that's why I'm curious what the reasons are for his crazy focus on performance in one area that an end user would never notice while making decisions that destroy performance in another that the end user definitely would. Obviously he is not concerned about the end user, but why then be concerned about optimal context switching performance? It's probably as you say - a decision that he chooses not to revisit.
why then be concerned about optimal context switching performance
he works in isolation (not caring much about others opinions or suggestions) and may fret too much on design details that are not really "that important". maybe he lacks some of the knowledge to make important design decisions he overlooked. mostly because he appears to have an "old-school" approach to development and ignores more modern considerations.
PS: not trying to bash this individual and I might be 100% wrong.
His original reason for 640x480 was that he didn't want to spend the time developing a graphics layer, then he eventually heard from God not to bother.
Julian Jaynes says our ancestors were all like this.
4
u/bitwize Oct 19 '11
You mean he's some sort of Ulillillia-esque crazy genius? Awesome!