OSDev.org

mathematician wrote:Off and on, I have spent the last few years looking for a C compiler which was:

a.) 64 bit
b.) Run under Windows
c.) Produced ELF files.

GCC is all three (including both interpretations of "64 bit"). Are there any other criteria that GCC does not satisfy?

Octocontrabass wrote:

mathematician wrote:Off and on, I have spent the last few years looking for a C compiler which was:

a.) 64 bit
b.) Run under Windows
c.) Produced ELF files.

GCC is all three (including both interpretations of "64 bit"). Are there any other criteria that GCC does not satisfy?

I know, but I hate Unix, and all its works; even when it comes in the form of Cygwin.

mathematician wrote:I know, but I hate Unix, and all its works; even when it comes in the form of Cygwin.

I hate Cygwin too, that's why I use MinGW/MSYS.

mathematician wrote:I know, but I hate Unix, and all its works; even when it comes in the form of Cygwin.

You probably know that the vast majority of tools actually used for OSdeving purposes run only on Unices natively. Microsoft should be ashamed that they don't have a proper compiler that is capable of producing any other formats than PE. You may hate the design of UNIX-like systems, but you can't just hate the software for it in general (e.g. I don't exactly like Windows, but LoL is still a good game, even though it only runs on Windows and OS X).

Saying that you don't like anything UNIX-related is like nazi logic: as if you'd only see black and white and there's nothing in between.

no92 wrote:

mathematician wrote:I know, but I hate Unix, and all its works; even when it comes in the form of Cygwin.

You probably know that the vast majority of tools actually used for OSdeving purposes run only on Unices natively. Microsoft should be ashamed that they don't have a proper compiler that is capable of producing any other formats than PE.

I still don't like Unix. Microsoft's latest compiler will produce code for Android.

I could help you, if you tell the reasons for which you don't like Unix software. Just saying that you hate something for no obvious reason just makes you look like a stupid noob.

no92 wrote:I could help you, if you tell the reasons for which you don't like Unix software. Just saying that you hate something for no obvious reason just makes you look like a stupid noob.

I only know that it always has me tearing my hair out. I don't bother to document particular instances, or to remember them.

At the moment I have a version of Linux sitting on a few spare gigabytes, but the loader decided to go absent without leave. My first reaction was, "Oh well, what do you expect? This is Unix after all."

mathematician wrote:At the moment I have a version of Linux sitting on a few spare gigabytes, but the loader decided to go absent without leave. My first reaction was, "Oh well, what do you expect? This is Unix after all."

Are you sure it isn't "You updated windows and it kicked everything else off your computer. What did you expect?"

Can we please limit the bashing of existing systems to 'every OS sucks' and focus on the language in question, please? 'Cos I frankly don't have enough time in the day to delineate how crappy all the existing operating systems are. There isn't a one which is even remotely any good, and that's a fact we simply have to live with for now.

[quote="mathematician"At the moment I have a version of Linux sitting on a few spare gigabytes, but the loader decided to go absent without leave.[/quote]

Boot into a livecd and rerun grub-install (and possibly grub-mkconfig).

I'd say that you are looking at the wrong end of the problem. It's not the language definition or the compiler that determines the object file format, but the assembler and binutils. I'd say that you need to start there, writing an assembler that can output elf64 object files and then a linker that can handle them, before worrying about the compiler end of thIngs.

TBH, I would have serious doubts that someone who dismsses out of hand a very successfull range of operating systems, and is unable to get a simple Linux installation to work, would be capable of producing such software. I suspect that you will get bogged down with this and never get as far as writing your OS.

Why not take the pragmatic approach and use Windows format object files or else bite the bullet and make the effort to learn Unix? Millions of people manage that; it's really not as difficult as it might seem.

iansjack wrote:I'd say that you are looking at the wrong end of the problem. It's not the language definition or the compiler that determines the object file format, but the assembler and binutils. I'd say that you need to start there, writing an assembler that can output elf64 object files and then a linker that can handle them, before worrying about the compiler end of thIngs.

TBH, I would have serious doubts that someone who dismsses out of hand a very successfull range of operating systems, and is unable to get a simple Linux installation to work, would be capable of producing such software. I suspect that you will get bogged down with this and never get as far as writing your OS.

Why not take the pragmatic approach and use Windows format object files or else bite the bullet and make the effort to learn Unix? Millions of people manage that; it's really not as difficult as it might seem.

http://web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf

If you seriously just posted a humorous work as an argument to support your "unix is had because I can't use it and I hate it" stance, I don't know what to think about the world anymore.

You need someone else (from 20 years ago) to tell us why you hate Unix?

I note that the forward is by an "Apple Fellow, Apple Computer Inc.". Who says irony is dead?

Kazinsal wrote:If you seriously just posted a humorous work as an argument to support your "unix is had because I can't use it and I hate it" stance, I don't know what to think about the world anymore.

Humorous if might be, but it is humour born of hard experience.