• knott <knott yandex.ru> Aug 16 2007
• Paul Collier <paching gmail.com> Aug 16 2007
• knott <knott yandex.ru> Aug 16 2007
• Paul Collier <paching gmail.com> Aug 16 2007
• Kyle Furlong <kylefurlong gmail.com> Aug 16 2007
• knott <knott yandex.ru> Aug 16 2007
• BCS <ao pathlink.com> Aug 16 2007
• kris <foo bar.com> Aug 16 2007
• BCS <ao pathlink.com> Aug 16 2007
• kris <foo bar.com> Aug 16 2007
• Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> Aug 16 2007
• kris <foo bar.com> Aug 16 2007
• Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> Aug 16 2007
• Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> Aug 16 2007
• Alexander Panek <alexander.panek brainsware.org> Aug 17 2007

knott <knott yandex.ru> writes:

Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.

Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode devel)?

Paul Collier <paching gmail.com> writes:

knott wrote:
 Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.
 
 Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode devel)?


to write a kernel in D. You can see them at dsource.org. If you're 
talking userspace development, I think you'll find that 95% of D 
projects already run in userspace ;) If you're talking about something 
in the middle, you can always bind D code to C APIs and disable the 
garbage collector if needed.

knott <knott yandex.ru> writes:

Paul Collier Wrote:

 knott wrote:
 Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.
 
 Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode devel)?


 to write a kernel in D. You can see them at dsource.org. If you're 
 talking userspace development, I think you'll find that 95% of D 
 projects already run in userspace ;) If you're talking about something 
 in the middle, you can always bind D code to C APIs and disable the 
 garbage collector if needed.


Im talking about a userspace development in system which in early stage of
development.
I want to write program on system which have only small(not full) C library.

Paul Collier <paching gmail.com> writes:

knott wrote:
 Paul Collier Wrote:
 
 knott wrote:
 Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.

 Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode devel)?


 to write a kernel in D. You can see them at dsource.org. If you're 
 talking userspace development, I think you'll find that 95% of D 
 projects already run in userspace ;) If you're talking about something 
 in the middle, you can always bind D code to C APIs and disable the 
 garbage collector if needed.


 Im talking about a userspace development in system which in early stage of
development.
 I want to write program on system which have only small(not full) C library.


OK, you may have to omit some bits of the standard library then. (Or 
just not use it.) Whether you use phobos or tango or whatever you like, 
the source is provided, so it's pretty easy to add version() statements 
to stick in workarounds if you want. Is the system using ulibc or 
something of the sort? I wonder how compatible that is...

(Also, this thread might be better to post on D.learn, but I'm not sure)

Kyle Furlong <kylefurlong gmail.com> writes:

Paul Collier wrote:
 knott wrote:
 Paul Collier Wrote:

 knott wrote:
 Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.

 Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode devel)?


 projects to write a kernel in D. You can see them at dsource.org. If 
 you're talking userspace development, I think you'll find that 95% of 
 D projects already run in userspace ;) If you're talking about 
 something in the middle, you can always bind D code to C APIs and 
 disable the garbage collector if needed.


 Im talking about a userspace development in system which in early 
 stage of development.
 I want to write program on system which have only small(not full) C 
 library.


 OK, you may have to omit some bits of the standard library then. (Or 
 just not use it.) Whether you use phobos or tango or whatever you like, 
 the source is provided, so it's pretty easy to add version() statements 
 to stick in workarounds if you want. Is the system using ulibc or 
 something of the sort? I wonder how compatible that is...
 
 (Also, this thread might be better to post on D.learn, but I'm not sure)


If the new platform has a standard C malloc, you can modify the runtime 
to use it fairly easily. I'm not sure if there are any other 
dependencies in the runtime.

knott <knott yandex.ru> writes:

Paul Collier Wrote:

 knott wrote:
 Paul Collier Wrote:
 
 knott wrote:
 Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.

 Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode devel)?


 to write a kernel in D. You can see them at dsource.org. If you're 
 talking userspace development, I think you'll find that 95% of D 
 projects already run in userspace ;) If you're talking about something 
 in the middle, you can always bind D code to C APIs and disable the 
 garbage collector if needed.


 Im talking about a userspace development in system which in early stage of
development.
 I want to write program on system which have only small(not full) C library.


 OK, you may have to omit some bits of the standard library then. (Or 
 just not use it.) Whether you use phobos or tango or whatever you like, 
 the source is provided, so it's pretty easy to add version() statements 
 to stick in workarounds if you want. Is the system using ulibc or 
 something of the sort? I wonder how compatible that is...
 
 (Also, this thread might be better to post on D.learn, but I'm not sure)


Can i disagree standart library and write my own one? 

BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:

Reply to knott,

 Can i disagree standart library and write my own one?
 


That's more or less what Tango is. So yes.

kris <foo bar.com> writes:

knott wrote:
 Paul Collier Wrote:
 
 knott wrote:
 Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.

 Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode devel)?


 to write a kernel in D. You can see them at dsource.org. If you're 
 talking userspace development, I think you'll find that 95% of D 
 projects already run in userspace ;) If you're talking about something 
 in the middle, you can always bind D code to C APIs and disable the 
 garbage collector if needed.


 Im talking about a userspace development in system which in early stage of
development.
 I want to write program on system which have only small(not full) C library.


Tango would rather not have the full C lib either. It rather 
deliberately uses only a handful of clib calls, and a (small) 
replacement for those has been on the cards for years. We just never got 
the time to do that.

We'd be very interested in a lightweight replacement for those few clib 
calls, written in D

BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:

Reply to kris,

 knott wrote:
 
 Paul Collier Wrote:
 
 knott wrote:
 
 Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.
 
 Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode
 devel)?
 


 projects to write a kernel in D. You can see them at dsource.org. If
 you're talking userspace development, I think you'll find that 95%
 of D projects already run in userspace ;) If you're talking about
 something in the middle, you can always bind D code to C APIs and
 disable the garbage collector if needed.
 


 stage of development. I want to write program on system which have
 only small(not full) C library.
 


 deliberately uses only a handful of clib calls, and a (small)
 replacement for those has been on the cards for years. We just never
 got the time to do that.
 
 We'd be very interested in a lightweight replacement for those few
 clib calls, written in D
 


How hard would it be to Have tango be running in D right up to the when system 
calls jump into kernel space?

with templates you could wrap the nitty gritty of systems calls real nice

R SystemCall(uint number, R, A...)
{
   asm
   {
      // whatever
   }
}

alias SystemCall!(SystemCallNumbers.open, int, ...) open;
...

kris <foo bar.com> writes:

Not very hard at all.

Tango itself doesn't really use clib when compiled for Win32 (uses Win32 
calls for most everything), so some of these notions are already in use.


BCS wrote:
 Reply to kris,


 How hard would it be to Have tango be running in D right up to the when 
 system calls jump into kernel space?
 
 with templates you could wrap the nitty gritty of systems calls real nice
 
 R SystemCall(uint number, R, A...)
 {
   asm
   {
      // whatever
   }
 }
 
 alias SystemCall!(SystemCallNumbers.open, int, ...) open;
 ...
 
 
 

Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> writes:

kris wrote:
 knott wrote:
 Paul Collier Wrote:

 knott wrote:
 Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.

 Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode devel)?


 projects to write a kernel in D. You can see them at dsource.org. If 
 you're talking userspace development, I think you'll find that 95% of 
 D projects already run in userspace ;) If you're talking about 
 something in the middle, you can always bind D code to C APIs and 
 disable the garbage collector if needed.


 Im talking about a userspace development in system which in early 
 stage of development.
 I want to write program on system which have only small(not full) C 
 library.


 Tango would rather not have the full C lib either. It rather 
 deliberately uses only a handful of clib calls, and a (small) 
 replacement for those has been on the cards for years. We just never got 
 the time to do that.
 
 We'd be very interested in a lightweight replacement for those few clib 
 calls, written in D


For what it's worth, the only standard C lib call of note used by the 
Tango runtime is malloc/free.  A few others are used for convenience 
(memset, memmove), but could easily be removed.

By the way, the Tango runtime is designed in a way to makes replacing 
the "standard library" portion quite easy, which may be of interest to 
you if you're thinking about writing your own.  I'll be discussing the 
design at the D conference next week.


Sean

kris <foo bar.com> writes:

Brad Roberts wrote:
 On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Sean Kelly wrote:
 
 kris wrote:
 knott wrote:
 Paul Collier Wrote:

 knott wrote:
 Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.

 Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode devel)?


 to write a kernel in D. You can see them at dsource.org. If you're
 talking userspace development, I think you'll find that 95% of D
 projects already run in userspace ;) If you're talking about something
 in the middle, you can always bind D code to C APIs and disable the
 garbage collector if needed.


 development.
 I want to write program on system which have only small(not full) C
 library.


 uses only a handful of clib calls, and a (small) replacement for those has
 been on the cards for years. We just never got the time to do that.

 We'd be very interested in a lightweight replacement for those few clib
 calls, written in D


 runtime is malloc/free.  A few others are used for convenience (memset,
 memmove), but could easily be removed.

 By the way, the Tango runtime is designed in a way to makes replacing the
 "standard library" portion quite easy, which may be of interest to you if
 you're thinking about writing your own.  I'll be discussing the design at the
 D conference next week.


 Sean


 There's others, file apis, socket apis, time apis, etc.. the list is quite 
 a bit longer than you might think.
 
 I really don't understand the desire to move off of libc.  libc provides a 
 number of very useful benefits:
 
   -- no need to understand the kernel call semantics for every os
   -- no need to figure out how to conform to posix (and other standards) 
      for each kernel/os.
   -- no need to re-optimize for each cpu interesting low level bits like
      how to move memory the fastest
   -- good malloc subsystems are _hard_ to write (definition of good is 
      obvious debatable)
 
 There's a big downside.. it's impossible in D to restrict usage of parts 
 of a library.. anyone can provide their own extern(C) blah and poke past 
 the abstractions that Tango and Phobos are trying to provide.
 
 Later,
 Brad


Perhaps not a question of moving "off" libc? An option to link with 
something simpler, or written in D, or whatever?

As for malloc(), many libs appear to use a derivative of Doug Lea's 
venerable incarnation :)

Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> writes:

On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Sean Kelly wrote:

 kris wrote:
 knott wrote:
 Paul Collier Wrote:
 
 knott wrote:
 Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.
 
 Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode devel)?


 to write a kernel in D. You can see them at dsource.org. If you're
 talking userspace development, I think you'll find that 95% of D
 projects already run in userspace ;) If you're talking about something
 in the middle, you can always bind D code to C APIs and disable the
 garbage collector if needed.


 Im talking about a userspace development in system which in early stage of
 development.
 I want to write program on system which have only small(not full) C
 library.


 Tango would rather not have the full C lib either. It rather deliberately
 uses only a handful of clib calls, and a (small) replacement for those has
 been on the cards for years. We just never got the time to do that.
 
 We'd be very interested in a lightweight replacement for those few clib
 calls, written in D


 For what it's worth, the only standard C lib call of note used by the Tango
 runtime is malloc/free.  A few others are used for convenience (memset,
 memmove), but could easily be removed.
 
 By the way, the Tango runtime is designed in a way to makes replacing the
 "standard library" portion quite easy, which may be of interest to you if
 you're thinking about writing your own.  I'll be discussing the design at the
 D conference next week.
 
 
 Sean


There's others, file apis, socket apis, time apis, etc.. the list is quite 
a bit longer than you might think.

I really don't understand the desire to move off of libc.  libc provides a 
number of very useful benefits:

  -- no need to understand the kernel call semantics for every os
  -- no need to figure out how to conform to posix (and other standards) 
     for each kernel/os.
  -- no need to re-optimize for each cpu interesting low level bits like
     how to move memory the fastest
  -- good malloc subsystems are _hard_ to write (definition of good is 
     obvious debatable)

There's a big downside.. it's impossible in D to restrict usage of parts 
of a library.. anyone can provide their own extern(C) blah and poke past 
the abstractions that Tango and Phobos are trying to provide.

Later,
Brad

Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:

knott wrote:
 Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.
 
 Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode devel)?


Yes.

Alexander Panek <alexander.panek brainsware.org> writes:

Walter Bright wrote:
 knott wrote:
 Hello. Before i start, i must apologize for my poor English.

 Can i use D language for OS development(Non-core - user mode devel)?


 Yes.


Oh great, I thought I would have to come up with that answer. ;)