No, it's bringing Aleph to the masses. Limbo is a cousin, and Dis was certainly very interesting and something I wish had caught on.

Partially, Go still doesn't support a few Limbo features.

However the influence is quite clear, plus the Oberon-2 style methods and SYSTEM package.

I don't know about Swift, but in C++, the complexity serves at least three purposes:

1. Backwards compatibility, in particular syntax-wise. New language-level functionality is introduced without changing existing syntax, but by exploiting what had been mal-formed instructions.

2. Catering to the principle of "you don't pay for what you don't use" - and that means that the built-ins are rather spartan, and for convenience you have to build up complex structures of code yourself.

3. A multi-paradigmatic approach and multiple, sometimes conflicting, usage scenarios for features (which detractors might call "can't make up your mind" or "design by committee").

The crazy thing is that over the years, the added complexity makes the code for many tasks simpler than it used to be. It may involve a lot of complexity in libraries and under-the-hood, but paradoxically, and for the lay users, C++ can be said to have gotten simpler. Until you have to go down the rabbit hole of course.

Since Rust depends on LLVM, which is massive, that is almost certainly true. It seems likely even if you don't include LLVM though.

That's interesting, thanks. I feel a need for simple multitasking/networking OS for synthesizable RV32I core (not RTOS like, but more like Unix or CP/M). Would be nice to try Plan9 on it once port is out.

I use one written in SpinalHDL. :-)

Next question is how much RAM it needs to boot and can it be used without rio ?