Does commercial mean closed source in this context though? It seems like a waste of resources not to provide the source code for an rtos.
Considering how small in size they tend to be + with their power/computational constraints I can’t imagine they have very effective DRM in place so it shouldn’t take that much to reverse engineer.
May as well just provide the source under some very restrictive license.
Don’t you have the code in most cases? Like with e.g. freeRTOS? That’s fully open source
Isn’t that still the same exact process as a normal compiler except in the case of embedded systems your OS is like a couple kilobytes large and just compiled along with the rest of your code?
As in, are those “crazy optimizations” not just standard compiler techniques, except applied to the entire OS+applications?
What study is that? Can you give a reference?
It’s a joy to do async in go IMO
You can run pihole on any linux system, not sure how compatibility is with windows/macos. I used to just run it locally. It also has some speed benefits to run it on the same machine that consumes it
Dogmatic statements like this lead to bad, messy code. I’m a firm believer that you should use whatever style fits the problem most.
Although I agree most code would be better if people followed this dogma, sometimes mutability is just more clean/idiomatic/efficient/…