[toyg]

Dude, you're likely typing on the "wrong" keyboard layout and use a "wrong" calendar... convention trumps correctness pretty much all the time. What matters is that enough people are doing it to make it "the way". I fully expect that we will eventually see a Javascript OS, because "it's so much easier to maintain".

[jonathonf]

> you're likely typing on the "wrong" keyboard layout and use a "wrong" calendar

When someone shows me/I find a better way to meet a requirement I will adopt it (static site generators, Go routines, ...). I won't doggedly stick to the first thing I learned; I don't expect the world to adapt to suit me.

[SSLy]

gotta leave this here: https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death...

[danellis]

We won't, because you can't write an OS in JavaScript; you need native code. Maybe a desktop environment or something, but not an OS.

[icebraining]

All languages can be compiled to native code, it's just harder for some. For example, here's an AOT compiler for JS: https://github.com/tmikov/jscomp

[danellis]

It's still a scripting language, and you still can't write an OS in it. There's no low-level access to the hardware. You could of course write all the low level parts in C, but then you haven't written an OS in JavaScript.

[adrianN]

C also doesn't have low level access to the hardware. The interesting bits of the OS are written in assembly.

[danellis]

I think the only bit that really needs to be in assembly is the context switch, but even that can be embedded in the C (which you might consider cheating, but isn't even an option in JavaScript).