this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2025
88 points (97.8% liked)

Linux

6118 readers
296 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system

Also check out:

Original icon base courtesy of [email protected] and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

That's not a good argument. Most of these additional languages are used for separate things, like build scripts and stuff. They don't affect actual kernel code which is C and assembler language.

[–] Corbin 6 points 2 weeks ago

Your argument is completely specious. Re-read that list. Assembly is a second language in the kernel already, and really it's multiple languages, one per supported ISA. Perl and Python scripts are used to generate data tables; there are multiple build-time languages. eBPF is evaluated at runtime; the kernel contains bytecode loaders, JIT compilers, and capability management for it. The kernel has already paid the initial cost of setting up a chimeric build process which evaluates many different languages at many different stages.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Perhaps not, but if you’re a kernel developer, I believe you are obliged to understand your build system and tooling. The fact of the languages aren’t all used at runtime seems immaterial.

That said, I am no kernel developer, so take it with a grain of salt.