Ask HN: What would justify writting an OS kernel in 2026?
I am making my own systems programming language, called Tig. I want to write an OS kernel with it in the future. But i've been wondering why would I do that? Linux won, it seems there are no blue oceans left. Any ideas?
Writing an OS kernel is fun, but very few OSes have wide adoption. That's not a reasonable goal to have, unless you've got a large customer lined up where your OS fills a need for their product intended for wide distribution.
If you want to build an OS, build it for fun, build it because you're bored, build it to learn, maybe even build it to show your language is capable of doing it. But don't build it with the expectation that it will get a large amount of use.
Especially if your OS is intended to be general purpose. If you wanted to build an OS for embedded stuff, you might find a niche, resource constraints mean there's more room for variation and making tradeoffs.
Fun, primarily. Or to learn. Or perhaps to show that something never done before (some unique combination of features) can be done. "Because the mountain is there".
Imho: if that doesn't do, don't even start. Or find existing project & contribute to that.
Myself, I've been wanting to dive into Forth systems. And get some hands-on experience with RISC-V assembly. So, over the past winter I've put together lots of bits & pieces of a small Forth-like system, targeting RV32I (eyeing the RP2350pc as a target device).
> Linux won
No, my Forth is much better! It'll be able to run on devices that Linux couldn't possibly ever run on (~10 KB ROM, similar size RAM), easier to understand, easier to change, doesn't need multi-GB software install to develop, should boot in milliseconds. And I wrote it myself - no AI.
Just saying... Linux is great for many things. Other OSes (or -kernels) good for other things.
> I am making my own systems programming language, called Tig.
Yeah i made the same question 17 days ago, i reposted it because i was bored. Here is the link, the lang is still very green, i am working on version 1.3.2
There are a lot of things that could be fixed like (off the top of my head) fork() and making filesystems async. A new kernel probably won't be adopted but there's still technical work to do.
If you want to build an OS, build it for fun, build it because you're bored, build it to learn, maybe even build it to show your language is capable of doing it. But don't build it with the expectation that it will get a large amount of use.
Especially if your OS is intended to be general purpose. If you wanted to build an OS for embedded stuff, you might find a niche, resource constraints mean there's more room for variation and making tradeoffs.
Imho: if that doesn't do, don't even start. Or find existing project & contribute to that.
Myself, I've been wanting to dive into Forth systems. And get some hands-on experience with RISC-V assembly. So, over the past winter I've put together lots of bits & pieces of a small Forth-like system, targeting RV32I (eyeing the RP2350pc as a target device).
> Linux won
No, my Forth is much better! It'll be able to run on devices that Linux couldn't possibly ever run on (~10 KB ROM, similar size RAM), easier to understand, easier to change, doesn't need multi-GB software install to develop, should boot in milliseconds. And I wrote it myself - no AI.
Just saying... Linux is great for many things. Other OSes (or -kernels) good for other things.
> I am making my own systems programming language, called Tig.
Link?
Edit: same question posted 17 days ago? Hmm...
the DOCUMENTATION/ folder has the roadmap and useful docs https://github.com/alonsovm44/tc-lang