Brutal OS reached milestone 4
61–70 of 75 posts
Re: Brutal OS reached milestone 4
#62Re: Brutal OS reached milestone 4
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah kerning is still WIP
Honestly the amount of crazy code involved in Linux font rendering[1], and then you get to CJKV support[2], it's mind-boggling. Even then, it's nowhere near as good as macOS :-/ [1] https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pango & https://github.com/harfbuzz/harfbuzz [2] https://www.amazon.co.uk/CJKV-Information-Processing-Ken-Lun...
Re: Brutal OS reached milestone 4
#64Is there a discord server or where does community gathers? This projects seems really cool and I would like to contribute.
Re: Brutal OS reached milestone 4
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A language like C but with lambdas isn't really C, not that that's a bad thing. At that point, why not just use Rust?
Because I might, in some conceivable future, wish to implement that obscure data structure the doubly-linked list.
Re: Brutal OS reached milestone 4
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
The idea is to take all the concepts we like about UNIX and iterate on them. It's UNIX as if it was invented now. For example, let's have a C compiler but let's add lambda and a more complete type system. Or let's have a shell, but let's have full ide like autocomplete to it. Or instead of plain text, let's use JSON
A language like C but with lambdas isn't really C, not that that's a bad thing. I was a little surprised that a compiler was in scope given the amount of other work that needed to be written and (hopefully) supported, though I guess that's a different issue.
Re: Brutal OS reached milestone 4
#67> BRUTAL is an operating system built from scratch in modern C. Modern as in C11? > BRUTAL is built on top of a capabilty based micro-kernel. Their own, or somebody else's? Why can't they just say which? > BRUTAL targets x86_64, i686, RISC-V and ARM. Ok, a decent set of targets, certainly for starting out with. > BRUTAL exposes its features to developers through clean APIs. Which are listed where? > BRUTAL features a…
Hi, Sorry if our doc is not fully fleshed out yet, the project is still in the early stages, and APIs and idioms keep changing rapidly. > Modern as in C11? As in bleeding-edge C23 > Their own, or somebody else's? Why can't they just say which? Our own > Which are listed where? We have a Doxygen doc but it's not published yet. > Did they reimplement the entire C library? Yes Hopes this answers your questions
> As in bleeding-edge C23
Well... looking at what's coming C23: https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/23
I see mostly syntactic sugar and a few adoptions from POSIX; and C17 didn't change much either. So, for me, this is basically C11 - which I still find very modern and does not seem that widely adopted TBH. So good on you. (But make sure to support code in older C standard versions.)
Also, I doubt that it is really a good idea to reimplement libc. I would assume taking on even more work than the already huge effort that is an OS would either slow you down or reduce quality. IIRC, when Linux got started, Torvalds ported gcc along with glibc and also bash. Could you explain your choice of a different direction?
Re: Brutal OS reached milestone 4
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ergonomics are important, and ignoring or powering through something that can injure you is a poor choice.
You know what you're doing right now. Stop it. We are not dainty wristed aliens yet. I love velcro shoes and elastic waistbands as much as the next guy, but this is bordering on comedy. How do you people lift a coffee cup with a straight face while saying this type of stuff?
Re: Brutal OS reached milestone 4
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because I might, in some conceivable future, wish to implement that obscure data structure the doubly-linked list.
Are doubly-linked lists actually rarely implemented? I thought they were the back end of things like python lists, or something similar.