On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 02:54:10 UTC, Whatsthisnow wrote:
What are your thoughts on how I have implemented the strcpy
type stuff?
It looks like you are trying to wrap D types to interact with C.
I think Walter's advice should be considered. Convert the files
to match the original as
On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 11:22:49 UTC, Whatsthisnow wrote:
thousands of programmers that program for Linux, so creating an
entire OS in D based on Linux would encourage (hopefully) a lot
of Linux programmers to also write for a D Linux. Since its
largely familiar, the learning process
On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 10:51:48 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
Alternatively help out Wild with his PowerNex project[0].
Pure D port isn't all that exciting, pure D OS that actually
tries to do things on its own, now that's something to write
home about!
[0]
On 18/12/2016 11:13 PM, Whatsthisnow wrote:
On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 08:05:20 UTC, Jacques Müller wrote:
A Minix port could be interesting as well. The kernel seems to be
pretty small.
Well if others want to work on porting those kernels they can, we could
potentially look into
On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 08:05:20 UTC, Jacques Müller wrote:
A Minix port could be interesting as well. The kernel seems to
be pretty small.
Well if others want to work on porting those kernels they can, we
could potentially look into expanding my repo to include all
kinds of kernel
A Minix port could be interesting as well. The kernel seems to be
pretty small.
On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 03:05:13 UTC, Whatsthisnow wrote:
On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 00:10:47 UTC, sarn wrote:
[...]
I am basing the kernel on Linux because, well, I like Linux,
and its the only complete kernel with free source that I
currently know of. Given that it is widely
On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 03:05:13 UTC, Whatsthisnow wrote:
I am basing the kernel on Linux because, well, I like Linux,
and its the only complete kernel with free source that I
currently know of. Given that it is widely
Used as an OS kernel, it kinda made sense to port it, give it a
new
On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 00:10:47 UTC, sarn wrote:
On Friday, 16 December 2016 at 16:12:38 UTC, D.Rex wrote:
A D port of the Linux Kernel?
https://github.com/whatsthisnow/ProjectD
Any thoughts on the project?
Depends on how strictly you want to reimplement GNU/Linux, or
whether
On Saturday, 17 December 2016 at 17:19:55 UTC, Jesse Phillips
wrote:
On Friday, 16 December 2016 at 16:12:38 UTC, D.Rex wrote:
A D port of the Linux Kernel?
https://github.com/whatsthisnow/ProjectD
Any thoughts on the project?
I think the project should have started with a fork of the
On Friday, 16 December 2016 at 16:12:38 UTC, D.Rex wrote:
A D port of the Linux Kernel?
https://github.com/whatsthisnow/ProjectD
Any thoughts on the project?
Depends on how strictly you want to reimplement GNU/Linux, or
whether something Posix-y is enough.
Anyway, a D "libc" would be
On Friday, 16 December 2016 at 16:12:38 UTC, D.Rex wrote:
A D port of the Linux Kernel?
https://github.com/whatsthisnow/ProjectD
Any thoughts on the project?
Linux is too bloated and there is no any reasons to re-implement
it.
On Friday, 16 December 2016 at 16:12:38 UTC, D.Rex wrote:
A D port of the Linux Kernel?
https://github.com/whatsthisnow/ProjectD
Any thoughts on the project?
I think the project should have started with a fork of the
official source and should always build a working kernel, making
A D port of the Linux Kernel?
https://github.com/whatsthisnow/ProjectD
Any thoughts on the project?
On Wednesday, 2 November 2016 at 13:56:22 UTC, qznc wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 16:22:58 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
[...]
Nevertheless, I don't see a successful D kernel in the
foreseeable future. Building a kernel for IoT devices is
trendy, but you want a lot more
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 16:22:58 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 11/01/2016 09:41 AM, Wild wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 12:12:29 UTC, Heisenberg wrote:
Just an idea. Do you think it would have any advantage
compared to the
one that is written in C?
I think it wouldn't
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 20:11:13 UTC, Karabuta wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 13:41:04 UTC, Wild wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 12:12:29 UTC, Heisenberg wrote:
Just an idea. Do you think it would have any advantage
compared to the one that is written in C?
It is better
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 13:41:04 UTC, Wild wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 12:12:29 UTC, Heisenberg wrote:
Just an idea. Do you think it would have any advantage
compared to the one that is written in C?
It is better to instead design a new kernel from scratch, and
structure
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 16:22:58 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
As an intellectual exercise, D's safety would help but at this
point impart little advantage; the kernel has reached good
stability and safety bugs are few and far across. This trend is
likely for the foreseeable future.
On 11/01/2016 09:41 AM, Wild wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 12:12:29 UTC, Heisenberg wrote:
Just an idea. Do you think it would have any advantage compared to the
one that is written in C?
I think it wouldn't really be worth it.
I tend to think the same but for different reasons.
D features
are for the
standard library and not directly from the language itself.
Porting the Linux kernel to D language to fix a few bugs isn't
really worth it,
if you have to implement all the stuff I mentioned.
It is better to instead design a new kernel from scratch, and
structure
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 12:12:29 UTC, Heisenberg wrote:
Just an idea. Do you think it would have any advantage compared
to the one that is written in C?
Look at https://github.com/Rikarin/Trinix for example
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 12:12:29 UTC, Heisenberg wrote:
Just an idea. Do you think it would have any advantage compared
to the one that is written in C?
It would have advantages : most kernel vulnerabilities are due to
buffer overflows, use-after-frees and such that are directly
Dne 1.11.2016 v 13:12 Heisenberg via Digitalmars-d napsal(a):
Just an idea. Do you think it would have any advantage compared to the
one that is written in C?
Same as any other software written in C. C is unsafe so in D it should
be more safe and easier to mantain
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 12:12:29 UTC, Heisenberg wrote:
Just an idea. Do you think it would have any advantage compared
to the one that is written in C?
There have been a number of projects working on this. For example:
https://github.com/Vild/PowerNex
Just an idea. Do you think it would have any advantage compared
to the one that is written in C?
26 matches
Mail list logo
