Multiplix, operating system kernel for RISC-V and AArch64 SBCs • Hacker News Board

Re: Multiplix, operating system kernel for RISC-V and AArch64 SBCs

#11

Post by deaddodo » Thu, Aug 31, 2023, 12:42 AM UTC

Philpax wrote: post #10

deaddodo wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why that's something worth wondering about. Maybe they like it? It's a perfectly reasonable systems language, even if it's not my personal favorite. It might be something questionable if they used Fortran or Algol-68, sure.

I think it's a fair question to ask; what particular qualities of D drew them off the beaten path for this kind of task? Now, I know the answer as a former D acolyte - it's an interesting language with powerful abstractions, albeit hobbled in some ways - but most people don't, so I think it a reasonable question to ask.

I guess the way I read it was my like "why would you choose D when Rust and Zig exist"...but you're right, it could have been a perfectly curious question.

Re: Multiplix, operating system kernel for RISC-V and AArch64 SBCs

#12

Post by msla » Thu, Aug 31, 2023, 1:22 AM UTC

zik wrote: post #8

Originally there was Multix. Then Unix was named as a reference to it. And now Multiplix is named as a reference to Unix. We've come full circle, just about.

> Originally there was Multix.

Multics.

Re: Multiplix, operating system kernel for RISC-V and AArch64 SBCs

#13

Post by nolan1299 » Thu, Aug 31, 2023, 2:00 AM UTC

this is really exciting stuff. looking forward to seeing future progress on this project

Re: Multiplix, operating system kernel for RISC-V and AArch64 SBCs

#14

Post by elromulous » Thu, Aug 31, 2023, 4:43 AM UTC

mrlonglong wrote: post #5

Walter Bright would be delighted. He's the author of the D language.

He often posts here

Re: Multiplix, operating system kernel for RISC-V and AArch64 SBCs

#15

Post by pjmlp » Thu, Aug 31, 2023, 6:25 AM UTC

Great to see a D based effort.

Re: Multiplix, operating system kernel for RISC-V and AArch64 SBCs

#16

Post by pjmlp » Thu, Aug 31, 2023, 6:26 AM UTC

deaddodo wrote: post #3

themerone wrote: post #2

I wonder why the developer picked the D language?

I wonder why that's something worth wondering about. Maybe they like it? It's a perfectly reasonable systems language, even if it's not my personal favorite. It might be something questionable if they used Fortran or Algol-68, sure.

Fortran and Algol 68 were used to write operating systems before C was invented, hardly questionable.

Re: Multiplix, operating system kernel for RISC-V and AArch64 SBCs

#17

Post by lionkor » Thu, Aug 31, 2023, 6:29 AM UTC

themerone wrote: post #2

I wonder why the developer picked the D language?

Cant speak for the author, but I would pick D for anything where C++ is appropriate, but I want to have less hassle (and dont need any dependencies).

D is very, very fun.

Re: Multiplix, operating system kernel for RISC-V and AArch64 SBCs

#18

Post by deaddodo » Thu, Aug 31, 2023, 7:24 AM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #16

deaddodo wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why that's something worth wondering about. Maybe they like it? It's a perfectly reasonable systems language, even if it's not my personal favorite. It might be something questionable if they used Fortran or Algol-68, sure.

Fortran and Algol 68 were used to write operating systems before C was invented, hardly questionable.

Starting a new OS in those languages today would be heavily questionable.

Re: Multiplix, operating system kernel for RISC-V and AArch64 SBCs

#19

Post by mrlonglong » Thu, Aug 31, 2023, 8:37 AM UTC

elromulous wrote: post #14

mrlonglong wrote: post #5

Walter Bright would be delighted. He's the author of the D language.

He often posts here

That's true. And I liked his Zorland C compiler when it first came out and didn't cost a fortune to buy.

Re: Multiplix, operating system kernel for RISC-V and AArch64 SBCs

#20

Post by pjmlp » Thu, Aug 31, 2023, 9:56 AM UTC

deaddodo wrote: post #18

pjmlp wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortran and Algol 68 were used to write operating systems before C was invented, hardly questionable.

Starting a new OS in those languages today would be heavily questionable.

Same applies to C, 10 years younger than them, less capable in language security, in an highly connected world, yet people keep doing it.