Not a bad thing to have. It shows some useful techniques for identifying code and could be used as a nice example of how simple an antivirus program can be.



Helpful for porting existing programs. Whether you like C or not, we're stuck with dealing with it for the forseeable future anyway. We might as well be able to use it when we need to.



I'm not sure I agree with that. For a GUI OS, it's small, and not overly complex, but it's far from perfect. A lot of work remains to be done on it IMO.



I've been using x86 assembly for over 8 years and I have trouble understanding the kernel source. It's been getting cleaner, but kernel.asm is still a pretty large file. More reorganization and refactoring of the source would be helpful.



I know a blind programmer; how could he use Menuet? No console support, and it doesn't work with any screen reading devices I've seen.



Just to make things clear here: I have tried Menuet, and I am impressed overall. It needs work, but is getting better. I hope the Menuet team makes a lot of progress over the next year. (I'm still waiting for them to include even basic console app support though... GUI isn't the best choice for everything)

I disagree, you see, not every programmer is interested in other operating systems (and yes, I know some people who are programmers but are not interested in other operating systems.)
So, who are you to change that ?

As some people stated, it's small, but far from perfect.
Because it doesn't have (YET) Office applications, etc. (applications that an AVERAGE user needs).


Not everyone is able to do that, for example: I can't read and understand some parts.

This IS YOUR opinion, and not everyone's opinion.

DennisCGc.

[quote="crc"]

I think if we will once have a kernel with comprehensive services then we should write an own library in assemby. That would be democratic. Take a look at the unix systems. If you are developing in program languages others than C(rap) you just pull an overhead in neck in order to convert your calls to C-calls. It's fooly antidemocratic and uneffective. If we had a low-level library entirely written in assembly then, I guess, we reached our aims. So we can still change the future.

But we first have to extend capabilities of our loved OS.

I agree with Endre, because you know which OS the asm lib will berun on and how MenuetOS deals with things, it would not be too hard to make libs in assembly.

\\\\||////
(@@)
ASHLEY4.

Batteries not included, Some assembly required.

I haven't seen any overhead in C system calls under unix. System calls can be inlined. It's soooo hard to use asm system call in C. For example



I don't see any overhead in linux applications coded in asm. You can jus put syscall number in eax, parameters in registers, do int 0x80 and you have return value in eax. You don't have to link asm programs with C library.

For example it's not worth to code in asm for GUI libraries such as GTK or even X11, because you end up converting structures from C to asm and calling library functions. I think that people don't code in asm for unixes because it would prevent their programs from running on another CPUs. There are other CPUs which are better that x86. If everyone in the world used CPUs with the same instruction set, you wouldn't have to code apps in high level languages, but they allow you to write code as you think it should work instead of thinking which registers you should use.

If there was no C/C++ you wouldn't have games such as DOOM 3 or Half Life 2.
Maybe it would be better to write programs directly using hex opcodes ?

Correct! And C is the only one from the wide range of programming languages with this characteristics. It's because of libc. Please be so kind to read a bit more thoroughly the posts you respond to. Don't become blind if it's about C.

Why do you think that C is the only one language? I know people writing programs in other languages (just for instance: ada, assembly, forth, fortran, etc.), too. I hope that with 15 years C programming routine you will see the situ similarly. I advise you searching the web for key-words "safety critical". You will cry about what those safety people write about your C language. And what is sadder: they are right.

One more example: Did you ever try DDD (you know the graphical front end for gdb written in C/C++, being actively developped for about 10 years)? And did you ever try GVD (you know the graphical front end for gdb written in Ada95)? Have you experienced any quality differences? I have no longer DDD installed...

I'm not blind about C. I didn't want to offend anyone. What I was saying is C compiler may inline system calls, and there's not only GNU libc. For example dietlibc is lightweight C library wilth all crappy functions separated from main code. I'm not saying that C is perfect but it does the job that I want, but recently I'm trying to code OS in C++.
I also code in asm, Java, C++, PHP and other languages. I don't like GDB and DDD (user interface is horrible). I have never tried GVD.
Actually I don't think asm is bad. It's harder to work with especially when I code program for multiple CPUs (avr, 8051, m68k) it's faster to code small application in C, but you get smaller code when you use asm. I think that asm is good for apps that you change hardly at all. So when I code an app for microcontroller I write prototype in C then I recode it in asm to get more optimized code.
I don't care what they write about C and I have no reason to cry When I see something which is easier to use, I just use it. BTW: Is asm safety-critical ?
I think that every language is useful when you code certain things. I just can't imageine Quake ]I[ written in Java.

BTW: Why people are screaming that C library for Menuet is so bad ? I didn't want to port whole unix environment. I just wanted to port few good games (doom, quake 1) and code good web browser with some more advanced features (javascript, java, flash, etc.)