TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Is it time to rewrite the Operating System in Rust? (2018) [video]

49 点作者 lnsp超过 3 年前

10 条评论

bcantrill超过 3 年前
This talk proved prophetic for me; since giving it three years ago, most of my technical work has been in the development of a <i>de novo</i> operating system in Rust -- not for its own sake, but rather because it is the right approach for the problem at hand. I talked about this a bit in a recent talk[0], but expect much more here soon, as we will be open sourcing this system in a few weeks.<p>Beyond the new system (called, appropriately enough, Hubris), we have been using Rust at more or less every layer of the stack: microcontroller firmware, early boot software, operating system kernel, hypervisor, and (of course) user-level. Again, this is not by fiat or to do it for its own sake; we are using Rust emphatically because it is the right tool for the job.<p>More generally: Rust has proved to be even more important that I thought it was when I gave this talk. My blog post from a year ago goes into some of this updated thinking[1], but honestly, my resolve on this continues to strengthen based on my own experience: Rust is -- truly -- a revolution for systems software.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=cuvp-e4ztC0" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=cuvp-e4ztC0</a><p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;dtrace.org&#x2F;blogs&#x2F;bmc&#x2F;2020&#x2F;10&#x2F;11&#x2F;rust-after-the-honeymoon&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;dtrace.org&#x2F;blogs&#x2F;bmc&#x2F;2020&#x2F;10&#x2F;11&#x2F;rust-after-the-honeym...</a>
评论 #28907299 未加载
IanSanders超过 3 年前
Is it time to redesign the entire technology stack?<p>Edit: Feels like half measures won&#x27;t move us very far (and taking a step back and refactoring <i>everything</i>, taking into account lessons we learned, while awesome, would likely not be financially viable)
评论 #28905361 未加载
评论 #28906232 未加载
guerrilla超过 3 年前
Anyone who watched the hour long video want to summarize? I dropped out after five minutes of pseudophilosophical rambling.
评论 #28904433 未加载
评论 #28904180 未加载
评论 #28904216 未加载
评论 #28904754 未加载
评论 #28904456 未加载
评论 #28904113 未加载
Verdex超过 3 年前
I mean ... sure? However, I won&#x27;t be funding it. At least not upfront. [That is, I might buy it after you finish and show it to be good.]<p>Rust is probably better than C or C++ for writing an OS ... however it has some behaviors that don&#x27;t make it ideal. Rewriting the OS in Rust will perhaps simply have to start over again when some frustrated OS devs go off and make an even better language for writing the OS.<p>Heavily augment the OS in Rust is a much more believable effort. The main architecture can be in C and then all the utilities, misc functionality, etc can be in Rust. This is also kind of what Rust was built to do (heavily augment a web browser already written in C++).<p>Finally, my money is on the far future having most OSes built with multiple languages. Each one specializing in what is required for the given domain. It sounds like Windows is already taking this route (iirc Windows 8 and 10 have some drivers (probably usb) written in the P language).<p>OSes are important enough for our society that I think it makes sense for us to put some extra effort into their construction. Several custom languages and 50ish years of calendar time to get an output feels like it&#x27;s going to be worth the cost.
评论 #28906158 未加载
scrubs超过 3 年前
Assume Rust is a better system language than C, which Linux is written in. In order to get something 10x better ... you&#x27;re gonna need better algos, or come with something that solves more problems in less code. Otherwise I don&#x27;t see the point. A better, stronger claim is: let&#x27;s rewrite sub-system &#x27;X&#x27; in Rust which implements simplifications &#x27;A,B,C,...&#x27; Unless there&#x27;s an order of 10 improvement ... the cost will not be overcome by benefits.
matt_s超过 3 年前
Just stop at &quot;rewrite&quot; - when is a full rewrite of anything really necessary? Whenever I see this, I immediately jump to &quot;its because they want to&quot;.
评论 #28905647 未加载
评论 #28905696 未加载
Shadonototra超过 3 年前
Rust is nice, it tries to solve certain kinds of memory bugs<p>But it introduce even bigger issues; slow build times<p>Being able to iterate SUPER QUICK is very important, you want to be able to test and see results as fast as possible, so you get to fix bugs or implement feature with ease<p>Imagine you get to work on super import product that needs super low latency and close to 0 downtime<p>You notice a bug, you have to deploy a fix ASAP<p>If your language makes you test&#x2F;deploy the issue in hours, then it&#x27;s very bad
评论 #28952474 未加载
nso95超过 3 年前
Rust isn&#x27;t a silver bullet
评论 #28904354 未加载
评论 #28904862 未加载
politician超过 3 年前
I’d be onboard with a Rust rewrite of Windows. Go for it! It’s the least memory-safe OS with most problems and the widest desktop deployment. Do the Rust folks do rewrites of closed source?
评论 #28905603 未加载
评论 #28906004 未加载
sys_64738超过 3 年前
No.