Re: 2.7 thoughts: common well-architected object model

[Ihar 'Philips' Filipau]

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

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/