OSDev.org

rootnode wrote:I use C# for OS development with an own compiler (also written in C#) to produce an AOT'd kernel and later it's going to be used as a JIT compiler.

turdus wrote:I use CL (this is my own programming language, that allows you to write and mix object oriented assembly and C) and fasm. I wrote the compiler in ANSI C, and I use gcc to compile it.
I did this because I really wanted to start from ground up (including the compiler, the ABI and the object/executable format). I choose fasm because it's fast, small, supports amd64 and incredibly easy to port. Nevertheless it has rich macro capabilities.

I'm pretty sure many of you wondering what's the source look like, here's an example:

Code: Select all

//tell the compiler that code blocks use fasm syntax
#codeblock "fasm"
import lib.stdio;
class app.helloworld{
  int counter=0; //initialized class variable
  //entry point and arguments, similar to C's
  int main(string[] args)
  {
    .var string hello="Hello World!" //initialized variable in local stack frame

    //some meaningless code in native assembly
    xor         rax, rax
    //same as counter++
    clbaseof    rbx, app_helloworld.counter   //rbx=&counter;
    inc         qword [rbx]
    //say hello
    clcall0     lib_stdio.printf, hello
    //return a value
    clret       0
  }
}
 - or -
import lib.stdio;
class app.helloworld {
  int counter=0;
  int main(){
    string hello="Hello World!";
    app.helloworld.counter++;    //will not call object.int.inc(counter) because it's an inline method
    lib.stdio.printf(hello);
    return(0);
  }
}

The compiler generates an intermediate assembly source file, that can be assembled with a macro assembler and the corresponding CL header file (that contains macros for machine independent mnemonics, like clbaseof or clret). Currently I have headers for fasm, nasm and gas.
CL has basic support for aspect paradigm, and supports operator overloading, dynamic linking, monitors (aka critical sections), randezvous points, class level polymorphism and multiple dispatch. It does not support (and never will) inheritance and virtual methods (you have virtual classes, you can't change one method in a class, only all methods at once if the old and new interface conforming).

jnc100 wrote:

rootnode wrote:I use C# for OS development with an own compiler (also written in C#) to produce an AOT'd kernel and later it's going to be used as a JIT compiler.

As do I although obviously mine is better
On a more serious note though good work on getting generics and delegates working, I remember what a faff it was. I often wish Microsoft had been less braindead when they designed CIL although that's possibly hoping for too much.

Regards,
John.

XenOS wrote:C++ and ASM, GCC and GAS, no IDE.

I prefer object oriented programming techniques which are easy to implement, mixed with a bit of ASM whenever this is necessary. GCC and GAS target all architectures I'm working with (x86 (32 / 64), ARM, M68K).

rootnode wrote:I use C# for OS development with an own compiler (also written in C#) to produce an AOT'd kernel and later it's going to be used as a JIT compiler.

Mozo40 wrote:

rootnode wrote:I use C# for OS development with an own compiler (also written in C#) to produce an AOT'd kernel and later it's going to be used as a JIT compiler.

are you using COSMOS?

What programing language are you using? and why?

Solar wrote:I don't have an OS project of my own, but I have to post this line, or I'll burst.

What programing language are you using? and why?

C++. Because I can.

Mozo40 wrote:Really it is a good programing language , even it can be used in developing an OS , i think it can be very useful in the future .