Xref: utzoo comp.os.mach:338 comp.os.v:64
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!samsung!usc!venera!isi.edu!raveling
From: raveling@isi.edu (Paul Raveling)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach,comp.os.v
Subject: Re: Which is better, process-based OS or object-based OS?
Message-ID: <12546@venera.UUCP>
Date: 23 Mar 90 01:04:13 GMT
References: <33030@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
Sender: news@venera.UUCP
Reply-To: raveling@isi.edu (Paul Raveling)
Distribution: usa
Organization: USC Information Sciences Institute
Lines: 23

In article <33030@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>, malcolm@oahu.cs.ucla.edu (Malcolm
Lui) writes:
> In your opinion, which type of operating system do you think is
> better, process-based OS such as Mach, or object-based OS such as
> Cronus?

	I'm not familiar with Cronus, and am probably out-of-date
	on Mach, but it might be worth putting in 2-bits-worth.
	What I consider the ideal environment is process-oriented,
	but operates in a way that makes it easy to run object-oriented
	applications by mapping each object onto a process.

	The bottom line from our experience with non-UNIX systems
	in the '70's was that Process-Oriented-Programming was a
	big winner, even without formal inheritance mechanisms.
	It's possible that the main challenge in combining process-
	and object-oriented approaches is to reap the benefits of
	inheritance without letting it get in the way.


----------------
Paul Raveling
Raveling@isi.edu