Writing an OS - Page 4

TheHeadFL · 03-02-2006, 03:58 PM

Procedural/imperative (the real name for 'structured' that he was describing) is indeed somewhat faster than Object-Oriented coding.

Everytime a member function of a class is called, the address of the function has to first be looked up in a Virtual Function lookup table, and then the actual function is executed. The added overhead of virtual function lookup is the real difference between OOP and non-OOP.

ATIRAGEPRO · 03-03-2006, 04:37 PM

i THINK THE 680x0 LINE OF CPUs would be a better choice.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/68000/

Here's some Compilers for 68000 c processor. (Only works with Unix. Sorry

)

http://www.programmersheaven.com/zone5/cat743/
http://www.isystem.com/technical/InC...20112_C_12.pdf
http://www.testech-elect.com/hitech/...s_compiler.htm
http://www.comsol.ch/content.php?si=...20C%20Compiler
This one is better than z80

furtivefelon · 03-04-2006, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mgoldb2
You are wrong to a certain degree. what the other person was talking about is SUN system which I going to guess have java chips in it. My school uses java chips to control robots. You put the code directly on the java chip and then the java code can run the robot. I going to guess the SUN system he was talking about uses something similar to this. On a x86 system you are correct there would be no way to make a OS in java.

I admit i could be wrong, but can you please point out a source of which entertains the possibility of embedding any sort of higher-than-assembly language directly into the hardware? Java is pretty high level to be embed into the hardware.. (hopefully that's what you mean

)

mgoldb2 · 03-05-2006, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by furtivefelon
I admit i could be wrong, but can you please point out a source of which entertains the possibility of embedding any sort of higher-than-assembly language directly into the hardware? Java is pretty high level to be embed into the hardware.. (hopefully that's what you mean )

Sorry was not quiet clear. C underlining language is assembly which all .86 computers uses. java does not use assembly but instead it uses Java bytecode and because of this you need a virtural machine to run the java code on a .86 machine.

The java chips I am talking about dont have the java language embeded into it but instead have java bytecode embeded instead of assembly. This allow you to use java on computer with these chips just like you use C in any .86 computer with no need of a virtual machine. This would also allow you to make a operating system base off of java on a machine that uses a java chip.

A list of some of the java chips are here

http://www.particle.kth.se/~lindsey/...r24/chips.html

you can think of java byte code as something similar to assembly language.

cowboyX · 03-06-2006, 02:03 AM

alrighty. I think my computer is in 'stable' candition. stable. not good. I only use it for SOME games. I am trying to get my dreamcast up and running (currently only webbrowser works) so I can play that. I use the DC for my main internet for now though. as soon as the PC is running I will use that once again.

ATIRAGEPRO · 03-06-2006, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by cowboyX
alrighty. I think my computer is in 'stable' candition. stable. not good. I only use it for SOME games. I am trying to get my dreamcast up and running (currently only webbrowser works) so I can play that. I use the DC for my main internet for now though. as soon as the PC is running I will use that once again.

Oh, man. Dreamcast is a cool web browser, but it isn't much when it comes to storage. (No hard drive) Good luck making use of that thing.

cowboyX · 03-06-2006, 06:28 PM

I was thinking about hacking web browser so it has Firefox capabilities, and making it so it can instantly compress/ de-compress files. LOLLERSKATES idk

hillbillybob · 03-07-2006, 01:30 PM

mmmmm......I would have to agree....now im no expert, but I believe that Linux, at least the kernel, would be your best starting point.

You would have quite a bit of support, file system, hardware and shell layers, while still being able to code in, if you so need the ability to, say drivers, JVM (that would be a novel idea, code in the java virutal machine and do everything else in java) and what not for it.

Now correct me if im wrong on the following -

Since your processor control is already taken care of by the kernel you wouldn't need to program anything in assembler, you could work almost entirely in C/C++ and tweak you own OS. On eadvantage I could see of this is your OS would be scalable and portable.

for your handheld -
I know PalmOS, for example, utilizes C for it's programming, and you can download the SDK/IDE for absolutly free.

Course like I said, im no expert, but that's just my opinion.

Ill def. keep an eye on this thread, I'm very interested in it.

cowboyX · 03-07-2006, 04:28 PM

well my computer is up and running again, but right now I am in the procces of writing a ICQ sort of program for my dad so he can get the the internet easier.

Dante_Caligari · 03-08-2006, 10:54 AM

I think someone may have said this already, but if you want to create your own OS, I would suggest learning Linux, obtaining one of the leading desktop OS's, (Xandros, etc.) and cleaning up the code to make it perfect. (That is, if you want to make a computer OS). That is what I am attempting to do right now, and that isn't exactly easy either since I just began learning Linux.

There is no possible way that a single person could code something like a Windows OS. As has been said, there were millions of lines of codes written for Microsoft's Windows.

I'm hoping someone soon comes up with competition to Windows. (Besides OS X)

Member Login