I somewhat disagree. Kernel programming requires and deserves the same
care, rigor and eye to details as all other serious systems. Whilst
performance is always a consideration, high-level languages give a
reward in ease of expression and improved reliability, such that a
notional performance cost is easily justified. Occasionally, precise
bit-diddling or tight timing requirements might necessitate use of
assembly; even so, a lot of bit-diddling can be expressed in high-level
languages.
Kernel programming might require a scintilla of assembly language, but
the very vast majority of it should be written in a high-level language.
There's an old joke that claims, "real programmers can write FORTRAN in
any language." It's true. Object orientation is a style of
programming, not a language, and while certain languages have intrinsic
support for this style, objects, methods, properties and inheritance can
be probably be written in any language. It's an issue of putting in
care and eye to detail.
Linux could be written in Objective-C, it could be written in Pascal,
but it is written in plain C, with a smattering of assembler. Does it
need to be more complicated than that?
--
