PowerNex: A Kernel Written In The D Programming Language

[unixfan2001]

There is no God! Braindead programmers. I can't possibly understand why the fuck would you waste your life like this working on such useless shit.

The only useless person here is you.
Stop complaining and accomplish something of your own, FFS!

[starshipeleven]

Porting the drivers from where, Linux? My understanding of licensing is that if you use a piece of code as a starting point, you have to use the same license or a compatible license even if you rewrite large portions of it. So I don't understand how any of the *BSD kernels can get drivers from Linux without shifting their license to GPLv2.

By mimicking linux kernel-driver interfaces (if they don't expect to have anyone make drivers for them, at least for now) or by using a compatibility layer in the kernel and adding precompiled binaries made from GPL sources.

I doubt FreeBSD devs are so bright to do something like this, their "compaqtibility layer" will of course still require them to rewrite stuff from scratch as they like to make stuff that can be taken freely by everyone.

[starshipeleven]

Everytime a new project comes up, trying something 'different' for fun, some dumb user comes in angry that we aren't a hivemind that works collectively to only improve one existing system to bring down M$

In the case of Master5000, it's "hivemind that works collectively to only improve Windows".

[starshipeleven]

d language is still good choice for kernel. on the other hand there is https://node-os.com/ with userspace writen in javascript. I'm waiting for them to reimplement kernel in js. this will be total brainfuck.

javascript is a (unbelievably shitty) scripting language, it needs an interpreter program to read it, it does not run on its own like compiled languages.

So unless the hardware itself is the interpreter (i.e. custom-made new-architecture hardware), there is no way in hell they can.

Still, with a FPGA they can surely try making a soft-processor that reads their javascript shit in hardware, and can have their own little shitty hardware js interpreter.
Would probably be the only way javascript can run at a decent speed.

And would cross the boundaries to the "everyone starts making their CPU" stage.

I'd approve that.

[Delgarde]

I guess if you find it fun then sure, go for it. I have no problem with coding for fun, but I don't understand the purpose of coding something that will likely never go beyond a proof of concept. To me, it's more fun to code something "for fun" that I can actually complete. I don't understand how it would be fun to create something that would be roughly as limited as DOS.

I've never written an OS, but I've written basic window managers, email clients, web servers, and other such things. Why? Because I enjoy learning things, and the best way to learn is to do. I've started hundreds of such dead-end projects that do nothing that hasn't been done better many times before. Why? Because it makes me better at what I do... it helps me understand how such things work, and the challenges of working with different technologies and problems.

[unixfan2001]

javascript is a (unbelievably shitty) scripting language, it needs an interpreter program to read it, it does not run on its own like compiled languages.

So unless the hardware itself is the interpreter (i.e. custom-made new-architecture hardware), there is no way in hell they can.

Still, with a FPGA they can surely try making a soft-processor that reads their javascript shit in hardware, and can have their own little shitty hardware js interpreter.
Would probably be the only way javascript can run at a decent speed.

And would cross the boundaries to the "everyone starts making their CPU" stage.

I'd approve that.

So I guess that means you won't be a fan of my javascript userspace (XUL + JS + ctypes) based hobby OS (backed by the Linux kernel, because I don't have the manpower to write a kernel from scratch) then?

[starshipeleven]

So I guess that means you won't be a fan of my javascript userspace (XUL + JS + ctypes) based hobby OS (backed by the Linux kernel, because I don't have the manpower to write a kernel from scratch) then?

Joke detected.
Unless you build a hardware js interpreter there is no way in hell you can run a kernel (and display manager and sound server and so on) written in js, and you are smart enough to know this already.

That said for most GUI-centric systems I personally do support ChromeOS-like OS where there is a kernel and then the rest is all run on a browser.
I still cry all nights because FirefoxOS was never really ported to desktops and it basically died in crappy low-end phones.

God, I would have loved buying a ChromeBook and then hack it to run FirefoxOS (and replace the sticker on the casing).

But on a headless system or a backend it's nonsense. There are a gazillion scripting languages that don't suck and run faster that can be used for backends.

[Delgarde]

So I guess that means you won't be a fan of my javascript userspace (XUL + JS + ctypes) based hobby OS (backed by the Linux kernel, because I don't have the manpower to write a kernel from scratch) then?

Sounds like mad science to me...

[unixfan2001]

Sounds like mad science to me...

It kind of is. But it's also kind of awesome. Currently, I'm working on a simple wrapper API I've dubbed "UNIX.js", that seeks to bring things like stdlib to js in any easily (by newbies) consumable way.

i. e. "unix.exit(0)" would close a js application with exit code 0, for one.

[starshipeleven]

It kind of is. But it's also kind of awesome. Currently, I'm working on a simple wrapper API I've dubbed "UNIX.js", that seeks to bring things like stdlib to js in any easily (by newbies) consumable way.

i. e. "unix.exit(0)" would close a js application with exit code 0, for one.

protip: "unix" is a trademark afaik (Novell? others?) so it's better if your thing does not use it if you plan to show it to others someday.

Since we are on it, and that I know little of these matters, how does your project differ from node-os?