First Rule of Google Fuchsia OS Is to Not to Talk About It

I don't see the rant; that's just the link to the whole discussion. Did you mean to link to a particular comment?

I haven't followed Fuchsia that closely, but I was under the impression that the team consisted of some all-star kernel developers; former BeOS people for example?

Can't tell which comment you mean, but if you mean the criticism that Dart is used as a userspace language, that's not related to the choice of kernel (which seems fine to me).

Did you intend to link to this? https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/6a026o/googles...

I'd suggest that it's possible we're using simple, but functional placeholder implementations of things so the entire system can boot and run, and then various parts of it can be worked on at various paces, in parallel, etc.

Lot of moving parts in a kernel, or OS, and one could try to write all of them in their final form first and hope they all work together when done, or one could take a more incremental approach.

Personally, I think the evolution of the general kernel design / syscall interface, love it or hate it, is more interesting than have we optimized the timer implementation yet...

https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/magenta/+/master/docs/conce... https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/magenta/+/master/docs/sysca...

(It's all a work in progress, which has been and will continue to evolve)

We all have bad days, but some of this rant is really toxic.

Dear god. I looked at the kernel and it's awful

Stuff real operating systems have solved decades ago

WTF?

This is hilarious. Did they decide to reinvent all the wheels badly just because someone at Google was bored?

The ex kernel developer in me feels insulted that a serious company would release something this immature

So, have they actually released Fuschia? I was under the impression that this was still being developed in the open until such time as it actually becomes a "real operating system"? And IMHO the world needs a good open-source microkernel OS; I'm ok if the scheduler is suboptimal on release - that can be fixed eventually. Linux will never be a microkernel OS, but Fuchsia can always be optimized. Performance-wise it just needs to be good-enough on release.

>Their tlb shootdown is not only synchronous, but it only shoots one page at a time, synchronously.

QNX6.6 introduced this too (as a fix for a race condition that existed in QNX6.5 and lower) and it was a huge pain to get actual realtime inbetween the TLB flush storms. Like, this is a make-or-break issue right there. TLB flushes can easily eat 10% of all CPU cores if you start and end a process every second.

Well there is this: https://lwn.net/Articles/718267/

When you are trying to invent a new version of anything low level, sometimes it makes sense for you to just stub out a supporting library out with a naive implementation, because you then have an interface that you can move around easily. If you are wrapping an existing implementation, with lots of optimizations and corner cases, you'll just get bogged down in refactoring all of those expectations over and over.

Today I implemented an immutable-ish array in JavaScript. I'm using it because I needed something that could work in conjunction with the non-relational, non-key-value database I am building. There were other libraries that provided immutable arrays, probably much better than my implementation. But because I wrote both the immutable data structure and the database, and both implementations are naive, I can very easily trade functionality back and forth between them in order to get the interface right where it needs to be.

There's a good chance I'll then swap out my data store for some existing algorithm, but I really won't know which algorithm I even need until after I've built several applications on top of the naive implementation.

Really, the key here is that this is prototyping. When you're building a prototype, you don't do the thing that will lead to the most correct code, you do the thing that will teach you the most about what the design should be.

They plagiarized our story. Please don't link to them.

Original: http://www.androidpolice.com/2017/05/19/googles-dave-burke-f...

Exactly this. And So fun to speculate on something far from its likely end goal or release state, because _only_ of who made it public.

A lot of cooks in the opinion kitchen looking out the window at wheat growing, pretending it’s already a baked cake, and of which they already dislike the taste.

(Disclosure: I work at Google, not on this.)

I can appreciate that, but I am also not excited about a walled garden growing around desktop.

When I first found out about Fuchsia (and from the comments on the HN post), I got the impression that it was supposed to be designed for both laptop/desktop (which excited me) and for mobile (which I couldn't care less about), but all the news I've read about it from third parties seem to describe it almost exclusively as a mobile OS. Is this just the media focusing on the parts that they think nontechnical people will find interesting, or were my initial impressions mistaken?

Or they wanted their own development platform that they had full control over. Having a RTOS OS that they can use anywhere from cars to phones is also a nice to have.

I had the same experience at Amazon with their secret projects, including each iteration of their kindle fires

Have you worked at any other public company? It's pretty common to not share private company information...