• Clint Olson <Clint_member pathlink.com> Dec 09 2003
• Ant <Ant_member pathlink.com> Dec 09 2003
• Mark Brudnak <Mark_member pathlink.com> Dec 09 2003
• "Charles Sanders" <sanders-consulting comcast.net> Dec 09 2003
• "Kwan Ting" <me here.com> Dec 09 2003
• John Reimer <jjreimer telus.net> Dec 09 2003

Clint Olson <Clint_member pathlink.com> writes:

I was curious if anyone has tried to do operating system development with D
since it is suitable for systems programming, even allowing access to the "bare
metal" via inline assembler?

If not, are there any reasons one would not be able to do this?

I assume you need to stay away from any portion of the runtime that requires
standard library calls.   Are there any guidelines on which parts to avoid?

Ant <Ant_member pathlink.com> writes:

In article <br589k$gi7$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Clint Olson says...
I was curious if anyone has tried to do operating system development with D
since it is suitable for systems programming, even allowing access to the "bare
metal" via inline assembler?

If not, are there any reasons one would not be able to do this?

I assume you need to stay away from any portion of the runtime that requires
standard library calls.   Are there any guidelines on which parts to avoid?


I found one recently.
Can't remember where, can't find it again.

Ant

Mark Brudnak <Mark_member pathlink.com> writes:

We could call it the "D Operating System" or DOS for short :^)

In article <br589k$gi7$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Clint Olson says...
I was curious if anyone has tried to do operating system development with D
since it is suitable for systems programming, even allowing access to the "bare
metal" via inline assembler?

If not, are there any reasons one would not be able to do this?

I assume you need to stay away from any portion of the runtime that requires
standard library calls.   Are there any guidelines on which parts to avoid?

"Charles Sanders" <sanders-consulting comcast.net> writes:

Hehe, I wonder what the original D stood for.

C

"Mark Brudnak" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:br5eku$qgj$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 We could call it the "D Operating System" or DOS for short :^)

 In article <br589k$gi7$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Clint Olson says...
I was curious if anyone has tried to do operating system development with




since it is suitable for systems programming, even allowing access to the




metal" via inline assembler?

If not, are there any reasons one would not be able to do this?

I assume you need to stay away from any portion of the runtime that




standard library calls.   Are there any guidelines on which parts to

"Kwan Ting" <me here.com> writes:

"Charles Sanders" <sanders-consulting comcast.net> wrote
 Hehe, I wonder what the original D stood for.


I'm sure it was "disk operating system".

 "Mark Brudnak" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote
 We could call it the "D Operating System" or DOS for short :^)




Nice one! :D

KTC
-- 
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
    - Heinrich Heine

John Reimer <jjreimer telus.net> writes:

Clint Olson wrote:
 I was curious if anyone has tried to do operating system development with D
 since it is suitable for systems programming, even allowing access to the "bare
 metal" via inline assembler?
 
 If not, are there any reasons one would not be able to do this?
 
 I assume you need to stay away from any portion of the runtime that requires
 standard library calls.   Are there any guidelines on which parts to avoid?
 


Checkout one_mad_alien's D kernel:

http://www.geocities.com/one_mad_alien/dkernel.html

I don't know if he has an updated site for this, but this was the one in 
my bookmarks.

Later,

John