Done, I sent you the specs and an example driver source code.SayedMohsen64 wrote:[email protected]omarrx024 wrote:Give me your email address and I will send it to you.
Thanks! I plan to make my OS on your filesystem. It seems really simple and easy.omarrx024 wrote:Done, I sent you the specs and an example driver source code.
Ohh thanks. I've been sure to keep it simple since I started.SayedMohsen64 wrote:Thanks! I plan to make my OS on your filesystem. It seems really simple and easy.
I'm pretty sure your English is better than 80% of the Internet! You speak in proper grammar and everything. Maybe we chat somewhere else because this is getting too off-topic.SayedMohsen64 wrote:PS: Is my English good?
it looks very good!!brunexgeek wrote:This might not be the best place to post, but I would like to show a mockup of my idea for GUI: a graphic mode console with a bottom toolbar (to launch GUI applications). The console have support to display graphics. The OS is primarily focused on scientific computing (simple simulations for now) and software development.
What about the code you borrowed from Muazzam?omarrx024 wrote: Yep -- here's someone who's copying my code, my design, my look-n-feel, my filesystem. This probably seems like Vector number two.
At least all I copied from you was the MBR.
Umm, I clearly said "at least all I copied from you was the MBR", here I am talking about Muazzam's MBR that I copied.seuti wrote:What about the code you borrowed from Muazzam?omarrx024 wrote: Yep -- here's someone who's copying my code, my design, my look-n-feel, my filesystem. This probably seems like Vector number two.
At least all I copied from you was the MBR.
Code: Select all
draw_window WIDTH,HEIGHT,TITLE
draw_button X_COORD,Y_COORD,WIDTH,HEIGHT,TITLEI think implementing assembler macros is easiest and best option than scripting language. Today's assemblers have powerful macro capabilities. For example (just an example) in NASM:omarrx024 wrote:Did some more work on my GUI widget toolkit today
I plan to implement my GUI as a scripting language, like for example:Code: Select all
draw_window WIDTH,HEIGHT,TITLE draw_button X_COORD,Y_COORD,WIDTH,HEIGHT,TITLE
Code: Select all
%macro draw_window 3 ; 3 is number of parameters
mov eax, %1 ; First parameter (width)
mov ebx, %2 ; 2nd parameter (height)
mov esi, %3 ; 3rd parameter (title)
mov edx, n ; Say, n is actual OS function draw_window
int 0x61 ; OS API
%endmacro
Code: Select all
draw_window 50, 50, title
But a programmer would need an %include file with all the macros, which I don't want.muazzam wrote:I think implementing assembler macros is easiest and best option than scripting language.
If course they will need an include file, but not with macros like this. I would prefer creating a scripting language with no need to directly call the kernel or the graphical API. It would help the programmer develop in a more "high level" environment.muazzam wrote:But why? Without include files, programmers will have to remember all the system call numbers (if writing in assembly). What if there 100+ system calls?. And scripting languages have certain limits.
So, why had you not written your OS in scripting language (managed code)?omarrx024 wrote: If course they will need an include file, but not with macros like this. I would prefer creating a scripting language with no need to directly call the kernel or the graphical API. It would help the programmer develop in a more "high level" environment.
Because, I personally, enjoy working in a low level environment. User program's developers might not like this, though, so I will instead develop a scripting language for them.muazzam wrote:So, why had you not written your OS in scripting language (managed code)?
Thats rightomarrx024 wrote: Because, I personally, enjoy working in a low level environment. User program's developers might not like this, though, so I will instead develop a scripting language for them.