Talk:What Order Should I Make Things In?
NICk vs Nick
Re: "NICk Stacky: Typo", with NIC meaning network interface controller that was definitely not a typing error. The real question should be whether we want the keep pun in its original (obvious) state or not, or if dear Solar happened to just miss that. - Combuster 17:30, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
- I admit I missed the pun. Apparently, it wasn't that obvious to begin with, as all other references to Nick Stacky in the Wiki use the default capitalization... but I'd be fine either way. -- Solar 20:24, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
New Archetypes
I would like to propose two other archetypes you occasionally run across: Hal Virtuell (exokernel/virtualizer focus) and Parsa Lang (systems based on new languages, and/or p-machine or high-level language interpreter kernel based design). Both have real-world examples (MIT Exokernel System, VM/370 and Xen; Smalltalk-80, FIG Forth, and JavaOS), and both are addressed in existing pages of the Wiki. Are these worth mentioning? -- Schol-R-LEA 01:58, 2 May 2008 (CDT)
You have a point. There do exist archetypes that write their OS in language XYZ for no other reason than proving it is possible - Yours truly included :). At one point I even considered getting Haskell support working next to the BASIC support I already had. The only real problem is, you can subdivide these people in two categories: the ones that could potentially be making an OS in HTML (which do not belong here at all), and the people who actually know what they're up to (which I expect to consider the article a funny bit of self-psychology, rather than being truly useful). IMHO "Alto Lango" would be a better name tho...
I wouldn't really want to devote an archetype to exokernels though. Either they virtualize the whole mess and come to something that's just running one other OS rather than really being one, or they're the exokernel type and take it just as a design decision to put everything into userspace, after which you can still apply the other existing archetypes.
The conclusion is really that I think that your proposed archetypes are really just a subset of possible design decisions. If you coerce the language archetype into getting several programming languages working, it will however perfectly do as a good archetype as being an extreme variant of a development path.
- Combuster 17:29, 3 May 2008 (CDT)
Here is a new archetype suggestion: Prof. Provost. His OS will be coded in Sing# if he ever makes a prototype, or maybe he'll use the B Method. Over several years of laborious academic research, he formalized the semantics of the memory manager and proved in Coq that his task scheduler is fair, leading to the publication of a dozen academic articles full of inscrutable mathematical symbols. Prof. Provost is interested in proving that the system is correct in all possible ways, but the implementation is left as an exercise for the reader.
Reaching Prof. Provost's level: The languages Prof. Provost spends the most time using are LaTeX to write memoirs, articles and reports, and Coq. Follow his trail, you will likely prusue a Ph.D in computer science (if you have the guts for it), and/or work in the research department of a large software company. You learn about abstract interpretation, proof assistants, formal methods and software verification.
His bookshelf contains mostly academic papers and conference proceedings.
People and OSes related to Prof. Provost:
- L4.verified (seL4 a.k.a Secure L4)
- Singularity by Microsoft (wikipedia article) is an operating system written in Sing#, a language that extends C# with contracts and invariants (in addition to low-level features).
- CompCert, a verified C compiler
Js 12:12, 18 May 2016 (CDT)
So Where's The Archetype for the Unix Impersonator?
You know the guy, he want's to make a unix better than unix was! After all, if Linux can pull it off so can he! Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Primis (talk • contribs) 22:23, 30 September 2013
- Oh wait. That's kinda me. --Sortie 05:17, 1 October 2013 (CDT)
- Writing an unix clone is IMO not a style extreme unlike the existing ones. There's little to say about it not being "normal" except that it feels uninspired - especially for all the ones merely running down the "write your own unix clone" tutorial. - Combuster 05:28, 1 October 2013 (CDT)
