osdev but for programming language development ?

[mathematician]

Correct - it appears on page 3 of that search.

Also correct - the problem is lack of content (which stems from lack of planning in setting up the site).

I agree that this is part of the problem - too little was done ahead of launching the site. There should have been a significant effort to prepare articles for the wiki before it went live, but it doesn't seem that many were written yet.

However, without being able to get into the wiki, there's no way to correct this. I was well prepared to contribute to it, but I could never get my account approved as the sole administrator seems to no longer be active on the web, there are anywhere else.

Since there is practically nothing on the existing site, the obvious answer would be to disband it, and start again - once you have got some content for it, of course.

[iansjack]

I suspect that we are all agreed that that would be the best course of action. Unfortunately, as has been pointed out, it seems to be impossible to contact the owner of the site.

[mathematician]

I suspect that we are all agreed that that would be the best course of action. Unfortunately, as has been pointed out, it seems to be impossible to contact the owner of the site.

In that case think of a new name for it, and get a new url

[iansjack]

I'm sure someone will. Personally, I am not convinced of the need for such a site.

[no92]

We had this discussion a few moths ago already. Some work was started on adding a section on that to the wiki, but isn't finished right now. I was working on a compiler programming tutorial, but I ran into some issues and put it on hold. I may try to finish it this weekend, given that anybody wants me to do so.

A site on compilerDev was started, but never got any popularity. We should use our OSdevwiki and put compiler-related things there. OSdev.org is, after all, well-known and usually listed 1st or 2nd in google searches, when looking for OSdevy stuff.

[cpusci]

Just an opinion and observation here but os, compiler, language type of development is a rather small niche when compared to say, oh web site dev, or general app dev. It's a lot harder to do, and most programmers that aren't up to snuff to do it, are either not interested in it (because it's too hard, or they lack the required knowledge) or lack the time and just long to do it. The subjects are complex, and time consuming and people's attention spans have lessened considerably over time.

I don't care where it's at, if we can do it here, then great. If we want/need a mirror, or a sister site, I'm willing to help out on that as well. I just don't want to see it die or go away. The information in the public eye itself is a big problem in the first place. Unless you've been in the industry, or know how it works from working with it for the last 20+ years, it becomes harder to find the information easily. Having a resource like this is pretty important just for the knowledge transfer alone.

You have to kind of expect that not many people are going to jump onto the site, and let it build up. To expect everyone that's interested to instantly find it and start jumping in on it is ridiculous and fairly unrealistic. Managing a site like that is definitely a labor of love or a fun hobby and should be seen as such. I appreciate the time people put into it, whether it's for helping others or simple because they like to.

[Arto]

It's perhaps a bit "old school", but since it hasn't been mentioned yet (in this thread) I'll go ahead and point out that the comp.compilers newsgroup exists.

[cpusci]

yeah it is a bit old school. It's a good resource though, one of the better ones. Though I don't know how many trying to learn now know what usenet is. Just need a page to store the tutorials and samples, otherwise I would have suggested it first

[iansjack]

TBH, I think there are many more resources on the web about compiler development, and they are of far better quality in general, than about OS development. There are also a wealth of books, both practical and theoretical, available on the subject. I don't think the two (compiler and OS development) are comparable in this respect; the need for a site such as this is obvious, the need for a compiler development site less so IMO.

[cpusci]

The same can be said of os development.. There are MANY books and resources for os development too, doesn't mean there isn't a need to pull some of those resources together into one place. eh, oh well.

[iansjack]

There are MANY books and resources for os development too

I think that is just untrue. For example, I haven't seen any online courses about OS development, and very few practical books on the subject. There are some online tutorials, mainly devoted to "Hello World"-type OSs, but most are of dubious quality. And the situation when this site was set up was much more restricted.

But if you are correct, and the demand exists, then the world will beat its way to a decent site. So, go ahead and set one up!

[mathematician]

For example, I haven't seen any online courses about OS development, and very few practical books on the subject. There are some online tutorials, mainly devoted to "Hello World"-type OSs, but most are of dubious quality. And the situation when this site was set up was much more restricted.

You haven't looked very hard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PnENFj ... MPPgAzNSNa

There are others, but that is the one I can quickly find. As for books:

Operating Systems Design and Implementation (Tanenbaum).
Modern Operating Systems (Tanenbaum)
Operating System Concepts (Silberschatz Galvin and Gagne)
Operating Systems, A Design Oriented Approach (Crowley)
USB: The Universal Serial Bus (Lunt)
PCI Express System Architecture (Budruk, Anderson and Shanley)

And then, of course, there is the Broken Thorn site.

[iansjack]

You can only list 6 books on OS development? I've got more than 6 on compiler development, and I am aware that there is a huge library on the subject! (Mind, there are far more books on OS development than those you list - just nowhere near as many as on compiler development.)

Anyway, this discussion is getting rather boring. If you guys think there is a demand for such a web site then just set one up and prove me wrong rather than wittering on about the need for one. You can hardly do worse than current attempts.

[cpusci]

Point is: There are more books on the subject and yet here we are. Either way, more people research compiler development and that's more accessible to most programmers than freakin os development, hence why more books on the subject. The number of books doesn't matter though, it's the quality of the material and no I'm not saying they are bad to begin with. Just stating that you really only need 4 or 5 of them to get a grasp and current ideology in mind. Should be able to write a functioning compiler after that. If not research more, no big deal. This isn't a contest.

@mathematician:
thanks for listing some of the knowns for os dev.

[Bender]

To be honest compiler development is a much "diverse" field than OS Development. Different OSes do a lot of similar things, especially when it comes to architecture specific operations. On the contrary I can write a compiler in many different ways, and use a variety of things, compared to the set of tools available for OS Development.

For example I can easily write a parser using the basic functionality provided by languages like C#, however others would want to use parser generators like ANTLR, Lex+Yacc combo etc. Not to mention that I've my own taste of syntax, while others may have different ones.

Also, compiler development IMHO is much logical than linear OS Development, a compiler is like a translator, writing a compiler involves more logic than just reading/copying code snippets. You can get a little far with OSDev while doing that, but it's impossible to even get a single step ahead without proper understanding in compiler development.

Else than that, compiler development is a pretty well researched topic, as iansjack points out there are plenty of books regarding the subject. There are articles dating back to 1999 (before this forum even existed), regarding this stuff.