> An OS has no business dictating implementation language.

As opposed to all those OSes that only publish headers in one language right that require everyone to go through heroic effort to interoperate with it?

> This mechanism seems ripe for squatting attacks. How do I know I'm talking to the service I want to contact instead of somebody squatting the name?

Nobody is going to stop you from typosquatting yourself, no

> As opposed to all those OSes that only publish headers in one language right that require everyone to go through heroic effort to interoperate with it?

Everyone can speak C ABI. It's just a matter of making memory and registers spell out the right things.

Only Rust can speak to a Rust API that needs monomorphization before it can be used. I'd have the same objection to an OS project based on a C++ API, BTW. (Android gets this wrong for some of their HALs, sadly.)

> Nobody is going to stop you from typosquatting yourself, no

True, but if it's about the same amount of work either way, you might as well design the system such that it could conceivably run services at different trust levels.

And if you don't have different trust levels? Why not just stick everything in one address space, like Midori?

I can see a case for something simpler and more streamlined than your typical Unix system, but I imagine that thing being something more this Zephyr or FreeRTOS and not require an MMU. This project does require an MMU and virtual memory.

I appreciate the effort that's gone into Xous, but I'm not sure who it's for except Rust fans who really like greenfield projects. It's just as alien as seL4 but without the mathematical correctness assurances.

I think it'd be cool to make something like this a middleware layer atop seL4 that helps make building systems with it practical.