@ravermeister mixing langs is ok, until all languages have a fast way to talk to libs they use in common. ASM is also no issue, but should only be used, when architecture specific code is needed or gets replaced/removed one after the other. Rust: it’s able to use the Kernel without bloating it up with lots of wrappers. As the compile process creates native machine code anyway, it doesn’t really matter. Linus would never vote for Rust, if it will result in a visible bottleneck.

@ravermeister @serenity what’s wrong with the Linux “performance”? The topic is wide spread, so it is important to name one spefic topic where other systems shine, but without further running software/daemons Linux should be very close to what is possible with native compiled code. A slim kernel without a lot of overhead, for instance for security, is always very fast. The more you add, the slower it will be. Most of the times the running software wastes performance, not the kernel.

@OptimusPrime no. Only for raising the virtual size of available RAM, but not for using.

@Amicchan @poVoq planning RAM with included swap is never a good idea. Swap is great for virtually upgrading your ‘useable’ RAM from the Software Perspektive, but the reason for using it by design makes no sense to me. Even on really fast NVME drives saving memory temporally to disk will be noticeable, at least at the system load.

@_ed @shreddy_scientist what else comes close to this all in one package? Evolution is nice but lacks some features.

@poVoq that’s a weird one 😃 (fast) launchers are okay, but by mouse? Had to take a look if mine is still there 🙂