Page 254 of 262
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2022 11:11 pm
by Kamal123
Now compositing window manager in Xeneva renders temporary windows called XEQuickWindow, which are helpful for rendering Popup menus, tooltips, notifications..etc. Not completed yet, but here's how it looks.
GitHub:
https://github.com/manaskamal/aurora-xeneva
Thanks,
Manas Kamal Choudhury
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2022 12:36 pm
by AndrewAPrice
Wow, nice work Kamal123. Pop-ups are something I'll have to deal with one day.
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2022 9:06 am
by max
I'm optimizing stuff
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2022 11:39 am
by frednora
Gramado OS
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2022 4:02 pm
by devc1
Nice work guys, I am literally stuck with ACPI, (X/E)HCI, and other drivers, stuck optimizing my kernel. Stuck wanting to make a VMSVGA 3D Driver (to know how to make the Graphics Library Driver). Then needs to make a Graphics library, then we will start our fancy GUI and Windows Manager. __** I am literally stuck forever hahaha. : )
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2022 9:55 am
by eekee
You're stuck? I still have "write a compiler" on my to-do list!
but only a very simple compiler. I got a little bit stuck on partition tables until I realised nothing actually has a problem with the mess Plan 9's fdisk makes of the c/h/s numbers.
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2022 10:51 am
by Kevin
max wrote:I'm optimizing stuff
I'm not sure if there is any measure of optimisation with abstract art!
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2022 11:54 am
by nexos
devc1 wrote:stuck optimizing my kernel
Premature optimization
always make you stuck.
I'm not talking about having a good basic algorithm from the start (e.g., you should always choose a hash table over a linked list for lists that require frequent lookups), that's always important. I mean trying to squeeze every possible nanosecond out of your code. It's not necessary until it is.
How do you know if it is necessary? Benchmark. Write your code, benchmark until you observe a bottleneck. Once you find a bottleneck, optimize it away.
Premature optimization makes you lose tons of time that could be spent doing important stuff. Remember, if there is no bottleneck, optimization is doing absolutely nothing from the user's standpoint.
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2022 12:51 pm
by vvaltchev
nexos wrote:I'm not talking about having a good basic algorithm from the start (e.g., you should always choose a hash table over a linked list for lists that require frequent lookups), that's always important. I mean trying to squeeze every possible nanosecond out of your code. It's not necessary until it is.
Agree 100% on this.
nexos wrote:How do you know if it is necessary? Benchmark. Write your code, benchmark until you observe a bottleneck. Once you find a bottleneck, optimize it away.
Premature optimization makes you lose tons of time that could be spent doing important stuff. Remember, if there is no bottleneck, optimization is doing absolutely nothing from the user's standpoint.
Do not agree here, at all. For sure that's the wrong thread for this discussion but I just wanted to point out that, by following that logic, a lot of software sucks. A piece of code could be 10x slower than necessary and be left not even
roughly "optimized" just because it's not in the "hot-path". What happens with this approach is that you reach millions line of code that is slow and laggish, but it's not clear why. Optimizing the current most expensive function in the hot-path leads only to marginal improvements and making major optimizations becomes insanely complicated. That's because the whole code has been written not caring about performance at all and has hidden scalability issues.
I'd say, write code with performance in mind ALL THE TIME, but don't micro-optimize unless it's necessary. Squeezing every nanosecond when that's hard to do so, is pointless in many places. But, just relaxing and accepting "whatever works" as long as it's not a bootleneck leads to a weird phenomenon called "death by a thousand cuts".
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2022 1:08 pm
by eekee
Interesting! It reminds me that my former friends who were opposed to "unnecessary" optimization were also opposed to very large codebases.
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2022 2:55 pm
by nexos
vvaltchev wrote:But, just relaxing and accepting "whatever works" as long as it's not a bootleneck leads to a weird phenomenon called "death by a thousand cuts".
Developers should write code with performance in mind always. I just think that bending over backwards to gain a few nanoseconds is a waste time, unless it does result in a bottleneck.
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2022 3:18 pm
by devc1
Of course I am not optimizing the GetCurrentProcess() function but I would want to optimize the Schedule(), malloc() and free() functions (because in the past, too much allocations will slow down the MMGR). As you know, this is not the thread for this. But whatever I had never tried to understand what is this hashmap. I just create linked lists and make a bitmap, use the "bsf" instruction to iterrate and allocate, then go to the next list.
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2022 3:37 pm
by vvaltchev
nexos wrote:Developers should write code with performance in mind always. I just think that bending over backwards to gain a few nanoseconds is a waste time, unless it does result in a bottleneck.
I totally agree. I'm against "bending over backwards" for a few nanoseconds: that needs a pretty solid justification. I'm happy that you like the basic premise of "write code with performance in mind"
Note that most developers (whom I talked with in my life) don't agree with that. It's a widespread trend today to just blindly forget about performance and quality until it's too late and the performance is unacceptable. Then, people start to do benchmarks and look for "low-hanging fruits" to optimize. That's way too late.
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2022 3:59 pm
by devc1
Yeah, that's what I am trying to justify. I don't know why people tend to put all the technologies and high performance in trash. I don't (...) know why Windows, languages such as python, and companies are making all these huge and vast performance losses.
Just try to do that with a chess engine and it will never reach a depth of 8.
You have a (...) multi-core 4000000000 GHz CPU powered with the latest SIMD technologies and you still can't make fast applications.
Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2022 4:00 pm
by devc1
devc1 wrote:Yeah, that's what I am trying to justify. I don't know why people tend to put all the technologies and high performance in trash. I don't (...) know why Windows, languages such as python, and companies are making all these huge and vast performance losses.
Just try to do that with a chess engine and it will never reach a depth of 8.
You have a (...) multi-core 4000000000 HZ CPU powered with the latest SIMD technologies and you still can't make fast applications.