

Why not port the Linux kernel to Common Lisp? - wslh
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1848029/why-not-port-linux-kernel-to-common-lisp

======
Millennium
As mentioned in the thread, mostly because at this point it's a massive block
of battle-tested code. That's not something one scraps and rewrites lightly,
and "because I like a different language" counts as rewriting it lightly. The
advantages of Lisp do not outweigh the disadvantages of a scrap-and-rewrite.

A kernel with a goal of Linux compatibility is another matter entirely:
something in Common Lisp or Go or Rust or some other language could make for a
very interesting project. But if someone were to design a kernel from the
ground up with this goal in mind, the internals would probably not look all
that much like those of Linux. Whether or not that's a good thing is left as
an exercise for the reader.

------
wtracy
If you want an OS written in a high-level language, pick up JNode
<[http://www.jnode.org>](http://www.jnode.org>); or House
<[http://programatica.cs.pdx.edu/House/>](http://programatica.cs.pdx.edu/House/>);
or HalVM <[http://halvm.org/>](http://halvm.org/>).

Oh, look, here's a web page dedicated to operating systems built in Lisp:
<http://linuxfinances.info/info/lisposes.html> (Scroll down a bit.)

------
krob
Rewriting linux kernel in common lisp would be like rebuilding the water &
electricity grid in NY,NY. It can be done, but with a lot of time and effort,
but before it gets off the ground people who know anything about the old
infrastructure will say it is probably a futile task and shouldn't be done.
That is why Linux is written in C, because it's dirty, it's effective &
efficient and people get shit done in it. Also C & assembly work together hand
in hand. C is a direct translation to asm.

