For a similar take on C++ unikernel, there is also OSv [1,2], from the same authors of seastar [3] and ScyllaDB.
[1] https://github.com/cloudius-systems/osv
[2] https://osv.io/
Includeable minimal operating system for C++
41–50 of 50 posts
Re: Includeable minimal operating system for C++
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok but the C abi includes basically all languages. Frankly they could toss C++ in the trash with basically zero impact to their value because who the hell with two neurons to rub together uses C++ anymore? (Ok this leaves out Go but they picked their path) Besides, supporting c++ must be a goddamn nightmare .
> who the hell with two neurons to rub together uses C++ anymore? I don't know. Then again I had my mandatory lobotomy when I started to professionally program in C++ 20 years ago (and still do to this day).
[deleted]
Re: Includeable minimal operating system for C++
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok but the C abi includes basically all languages. Frankly they could toss C++ in the trash with basically zero impact to their value because who the hell with two neurons to rub together uses C++ anymore? (Ok this leaves out Go but they picked their path) Besides, supporting c++ must be a goddamn nightmare .
> who the hell with two neurons to rub together uses C++ anymore? I don't know. Then again I had my mandatory lobotomy when I started to professionally program in C++ 20 years ago (and still do to this day).
I agree that people still use C++, I just find it very difficult to imagine a C++ programmer I'd trust as much as the rust compiler. Hence my comment.
FWIW, I programmed C++ for 15 years—it's a useful tool, but it doesn't have much use anymore outside of legacy tooling, codebases, and developers who can't learn new things.
Re: Includeable minimal operating system for C++
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
> who the hell with two neurons to rub together uses C++ anymore? I don't know. Then again I had my mandatory lobotomy when I started to professionally program in C++ 20 years ago (and still do to this day).
I agree that people still use C++, I just find it very difficult to imagine a C++ programmer I'd trust as much as the rust compiler. Hence my comment. FWIW, I programmed C++ for 15 years—it's a useful tool, but it doesn't have much use anymore outside of legacy tooling, codebases, and developers who can't learn new things.
> I just find it very difficult to imagine a C++ programmer I'd trust as much as the rust compiler.
It's even more difficult to imagine a javascript programmer I'd trust more than any C++ compiler.
Re: Includeable minimal operating system for C++
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
The FTC has guidance on when it considers a compensated endorsement to be "deceptive advertising", which is something they can legally enforce. [0] [0] https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/ftcs-endorse...
This seems like a farce. Most advertising in america is deceptive. Edit: they seem to only enforce disclosure and they don't actually evaluate whether the ad is deceptive or not. Still this does seem to foreclose on the domain user in question's use of ads, if anyone cares > If the advertiser doesn’t have proof that the endorser’s experience represents what people will generally achieve using the product as described…
> This seems like a farce. Most advertising in america is deceptive.
Yes, that's because many of the regulatory and consumer protection agencies are neutered by illegal businesses.
Re: Includeable minimal operating system for C++
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
according to wayback machine the domain expired at the end of 2021. Months later it came back with the sneaky ad. Their page at github https://includeos.github.io/ does not have it. It is safe to assume whoever grabbed the domain has no association to the authors. Project has been dead for many years now btw.
You're completely right. It's a squatter and he wants money. The project is not dead, however. It's currently used for research at University of Oslo, and I think we can expect much more activity in the coming years, such as ARM support. I might add RISC-V support myself, as I am the author of libriscv. We'll see.
> You're completely right. It's a squatter and he wants money. The project is not dead, however. It's currently used for research at University of Oslo
If someone bought the domain and is re-using the same assets to put advertisements up then the author of includeos would have some real teeth in courts...
Re: Includeable minimal operating system for C++
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're completely right. It's a squatter and he wants money. The project is not dead, however. It's currently used for research at University of Oslo, and I think we can expect much more activity in the coming years, such as ARM support. I might add RISC-V support myself, as I am the author of libriscv. We'll see.
> You're completely right. It's a squatter and he wants money. The project is not dead, however. It's currently used for research at University of Oslo If someone bought the domain and is re-using the same assets to put advertisements up then the author of includeos would have some real teeth in courts...
Yes, we have spoken to a lawyer and it is indeed the case. It still costs money, and we are not sure how to proceed yet, outside of removing links to the domain.
Re: Includeable minimal operating system for C++
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that people still use C++, I just find it very difficult to imagine a C++ programmer I'd trust as much as the rust compiler. Hence my comment. FWIW, I programmed C++ for 15 years—it's a useful tool, but it doesn't have much use anymore outside of legacy tooling, codebases, and developers who can't learn new things.
> I just find it very difficult to imagine a C++ programmer I'd trust as much as the rust compiler. It's even more difficult to imagine a javascript programmer I'd trust more than any C++ compiler.
How is that relevant? Who is suggesting replacing c++ with javascript?
Re: Includeable minimal operating system for C++
#49This seems very interesting! But... "So IncludeOS can compile C and C++ applications natively. Currently, these are the only programming languages supported. We’ll add support for other language runtimes in 2019." Last blog update is 2019. Is the project still alive? edit: github shows recent activity, so it is encouraging.
Ok but the C abi includes basically all languages. Frankly they could toss C++ in the trash with basically zero impact to their value because who the hell with two neurons to rub together uses C++ anymore? (Ok this leaves out Go but they picked their path) Besides, supporting c++ must be a goddamn nightmare .
Lets put it this way, C++ is C's Typescript.
Everything about JavaScript WATs applies equally well to C.
Re: Includeable minimal operating system for C++
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I just find it very difficult to imagine a C++ programmer I'd trust as much as the rust compiler. It's even more difficult to imagine a javascript programmer I'd trust more than any C++ compiler.
How is that relevant? Who is suggesting replacing c++ with javascript?
It's as relevant as someone suggesting replacing C++ with rust. They're both great languages, and one just happens to be memory unsafe. In C++ vs javascript, they're both great languages but one just happens to be type unsafe. Regardless, each language has its own target purposes. That's how it's relevant.
So:
> I just find it very difficult to imagine a C++ programmer I'd trust as much as the rust compiler
I don't think anybody could reasonably say that C++ from 20 years ago is competitive with rust particularly since rust wasn't around back then. But the C++ of today isn't what it was 20 years ago. C++ isn't a single revision of the language. There are many versions of the language. There's no reason a new version of C++ can't improve upon one of its weaknesses... or even some of its strengths. Whether that's by learning different techniques from other languages or building upon its own, it would take solid C++ engineers, not rust engineers, to improve the language.
I'm only saying: there are a lot of software engineers who treat software engineering as their day job (eg, little if perhaps any passion about the language) but there are also plenty, if perhaps a minority, of engineers with a passion for the language; and the language can evolve to be more safe and has continuously done so over the past 20 years and will continue to do so well into the future. Rust certainly has its passionate engineers too, and a lot of other engineers on the bandwagon because they don't have to learn hard things like how to design software well in the first place.
All that to say: having the a good compiler (rust or not) is great but it won't save you from a poorly experienced engineer's design. Poorly experienced engineers aren't exclusive to C++.