Re: 2.7 thoughts: common well-architected object model

Ihar 'Philips' Filipau
2003-10-11T17:03:58Z

asdfd esadd wrote:
> the other OS has an at this stage highly consistent
> object model user along the lines of COM+ from the
> kernel up encompassing a single event, thread etc.
> model. Things are quite consistently wrapped, user
> mode exposed if needed etc. If people were to fully
> draw on it and the simpler .net BCL and not ride win32
> that would (will be) a killer.
>
> So let me restate the need:
>
> * a unified well architected core component model
> which is extensible from OS services to application
> objects
>
> * the object model should be defined from the kernel
> layer for process/events/devices etc. up and not
> started at the application layer
>

Hm.

Any real world application for which POSIX is not enough?
Any real world application which can benefit /enourmosly/ from this?

State, please, problem first - do not put the requirements ahead of
problem.

Since as of event system I would say POSIX (and Linux in particular)
far ahead of permanently inconsistent Win32.
[ Win32 is a very bad example, since you have there a "spawn one more
thread" solution/workaround for any problem. Try to read MSDN by yourself. ]

P.S. <kidding> Probably Java is what you are looking for? (java.* after
all some kind of kernel for Java, and jvm is some kind of cpu ;-))))
</kidding>

--
Ihar 'Philips' Filipau / with best regards from Saarbruecken.
--
"... and for $64000 question, could you get yourself vaguely
familiar with the notion of on-topic posting?"
-- Al Viro @ LKML