An operating system written in D would be really interesting. On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Andrej Mitrovic < [email protected]> wrote:
> On 10/6/10, Nick Sabalausky <[email protected]> wrote: > > "sybrandy" <[email protected]> wrote in message > > news:[email protected]... > >> Just asking out of curiosity. With all the great language features, I'm > >> sure that many of you have thought about this. > >> > >> For me, I figured a good start would be your basic Unix/Linux/BSD > >> utilities, like cat and grep. I figure it may make the code easier to > >> read and maintain as well as potentially improve the quality of the > >> software. Of course, most of these are so old they're probably quite > bug > >> free, but some probably could use a rewrite. Some may even benefit for > >> threading. > >> > > > > Not that I would want to do it myself, but I'd like to see LLMV and > > Scintilla moved to D. > > > > But really, just about anything in C/C++ that I might ever want to > modify. > > If I never have to touch another line of C/C++ it'll be too soon. > > > > > > > > FYI, there's a DFL Scintilla component you can use in D2, which is > downloaded separately from DFL. I've made a small update to it in the > DFL forums although you would also need to add one more method in the > scintilla class to get messages back from Scintilla itself (I'll post > an update to the DFL forums some time later for that). > > So basically the DFL component loads the scintilla DLL, and you can > use message passing or optionally get a function pointer for direct > access. It's really easy to use the editor from D in this way. In > fact, you can port *Scite* source code to a D equivalent that uses the > Scintilla DLL with ease. It only took me a minute to port the > automatic indentation functionality from Scite to a fresh project that > uses the DFLs Scintilla class. > > I wouldn't know if there are any bottlenecks in the Scintilla > codebase, so I can't judge if it's worth porting to D. But it already > works and you can use it from D already, so why go through all the > trouble of rewriting it? :-) >
