Is modularity a part of any of your OS's? If so, how and in what way?
Also, are there any popular online resources with information geared toward modularity?
Modules
-
beyondsociety
Re:Modules
In fact alot of people on this os forum are implementing modularity into their os's. I eventually will go to a modular design, but for now ts not that much of a priority.Nobody uses modularity? Does it have a downfall?
Im not sure what downfalls it would have, as I havent researched it or implemented it. One of the other guys: Tim or Pype should know when ever they get back from vacation. I suggest googling for your answer.
-
chris
Re:Modules
When parts of the OS are broken down to small independently functional "applications" that complete a specific task. They can be dynamicaly loaded/unloaded.zloba wrote: what do you mean by modulartiy?
-
chris
Re:Modules
Hmm I can't seem to find any really good url's from google on modules 
. I don't really understand anything other than the concept.
. I don't really understand anything other than the concept.-
zloba
Re:Modules
i think this is a matter of design of any particular project..
if you look at linux, for example, there are loadable kernel modules, such as device drivers, filesystems, protocols etc. similar picture in windows.
it makes sense, too - no particular system will need all possible drivers or filesystems simultaneously, so only those that are used get loaded.
then, there are non-kernel services that can also be thought of as part of the os but that are completely outside the kernel, such as GUI, shells, just about anything.
so you can look at your design and decide how you want it.
you may need extra design and programming to facilitate handling those modules, and possibly run-time overhead, depending on how you implement it.
the good thing is that if you do it properly, code will be more manageable and easier to debug, and the whole thing, supposedly, will be more stable and neat.
if you look at linux, for example, there are loadable kernel modules, such as device drivers, filesystems, protocols etc. similar picture in windows.
it makes sense, too - no particular system will need all possible drivers or filesystems simultaneously, so only those that are used get loaded.
then, there are non-kernel services that can also be thought of as part of the os but that are completely outside the kernel, such as GUI, shells, just about anything.
so you can look at your design and decide how you want it.
you may need extra design and programming to facilitate handling those modules, and possibly run-time overhead, depending on how you implement it.
the good thing is that if you do it properly, code will be more manageable and easier to debug, and the whole thing, supposedly, will be more stable and neat.
-
Pype.Clicker
- Member
- Posts: 5964
- Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 2:31 am
- Location: In a galaxy, far, far away
- Contact:
Re:Modules
clicker does have a module support, and that's an area when most of the effort has been put to have something powerful and efficient.
you may like to read
the overview of the Kernel Dynamix System, which is the core service that allows me to load/link modules with the running system, resolve and call dynamic services, replace services providers smoothly, etc.
the "how to create a C32 kernel module" tutorial,
the file format clicker's KMOD uses
There are also very interresting informations about Linux modules in "Programmation Linux 2.0" by R?my Card, Eric Dumas and Franck M?vel (dunno about non-french translations, unfortunately)
you may like to read
the overview of the Kernel Dynamix System, which is the core service that allows me to load/link modules with the running system, resolve and call dynamic services, replace services providers smoothly, etc.
the "how to create a C32 kernel module" tutorial,
the file format clicker's KMOD uses
There are also very interresting informations about Linux modules in "Programmation Linux 2.0" by R?my Card, Eric Dumas and Franck M?vel (dunno about non-french translations, unfortunately)