Bona Fide OS Development

Page 2 of 3

Author:  Agalloch [ Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Alchemy

Terry A. Davis wrote:
What's your point?

What do you mean, what is my point? Are you actually arguing for the sake of it without even commiting the basic linguistic capacity required to comprehend context. I will repeat the conversation to you only once. The OP has claimed it possible for him to complete his Operating System in only 4 years with 15+ programmers (though with the implication of less than 533 developers), you have admitted my numbers realistic, therefore his claims are mathematically impossible. This is all that has been talked about, what exactly did you feel you were responding to?

I don't appreciate you quoting "God", and will refrain from quoting the equally offensive Hitler, instead quoting your "God".

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

Please stop quoting a being, whether fictional or not, who would ask you to put me to death, it's highly offensive.

Author:  Terry A. Davis [ Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Alchemy

If God wanted you dead, I'd let Him do it himself.

You make a fallacy assuming whatever Linux or Microsoft says is relevant to this discussion. I don't see in any way what the line count of windows or linux has to do with writing an operating system. They want to indimidate for one thing. Linux is written by amateurs for another thing. Hardware has simplified many things. Windows has a buttload of legacy crap and Linux does, too.

Nine women can't make a baby in one month. The more people working on Linux or Windows, the more crappy code.

You assume there is only one way to do stuff--why are you bothering if you're just gonna reinvent Windows or Linux. If it's not an worthless clone, then how are their numbers relevant?

This makes me crack-up laughing. Generally, God's not so crass as to just strike people dead, but I know of like 3 places.
When they came to the threshing floor of Nodan, Uzzah reached out his hand to the ark of God and steadied it, for the oxen were making it tip.
But the LORD was angry with Uzzah; God struck him on that spot, and he died there before God.
David was disturbed because the LORD had vented his anger on Uzzah. (The place has been called Perez-uzzah down to the present day.)

If you want to know why I was in a bad mood, I hate when people quote 50 million as though its good. Pisses me off. Bigger is a sign of weakness, not strength, especially in any prolonged time-frame. (Maintenance burden and not being agile.) Users are a liability, too. They tie your hands because you can't change stuff. There's a classic story from Microsoft where some application relied on a bug and Microsoft had to accomodate that behavior in the next version or customers would be upset. The more users, the more pinned-down you are. Microsoft is essentually stuck, at this point and can't do much, truth be told.

I'm not actually incompetition with Microsoft, but I sometimes lapse into that thinking.

Author:  DudeOfX [ Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Alchemy

my two cents is that an Operating System... a worth while cutting edge Operating Sytem can be completed in less then a year by a couple people...

Author:  Terry A. Davis [ Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Alchemy

There's an operating system called "BareMetal" or something like that which is 64-bit and multicored, but one task per core. That's pretty smart because there probably is a niche for something which gives you full control and gets out of the way.

Author:  Ford [ Wed Nov 17, 2010 1:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Alchemy

Earliest post that I saw was 2005. So, in under 5 years the guys at menuet wrote an operating system with networking, a nice gui, several programs and a few games... IT FITS ON A FLOPPY. In what universe can you make a claim that the big three are better because there is more code? If you can do the same stuff with less code, less resource usage, and more agility... why not do it?

The ONLY thing that I can see taking a lot of time is a compiler. Putting an OS together isn't all that tough if you have the right people with the right expertise.

Author:  ctimko [ Thu Nov 25, 2010 10:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Alchemy

How do you count lines of code? Do we count the lines of assembly or do we count the lines of C? I have written over 20,000 lines after 4 months..but I am counting { } braces too (and the words on their own line).

Author:  Ford [ Sat Nov 27, 2010 10:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Alchemy

ctimko wrote:
How do you count lines of code? Do we count the lines of assembly or do we count the lines of C? I have written over 20,000 lines after 4 months..but I am counting { } braces too (and the words on their own line).

That's a really good point. I would say that this is reason enough to not count lines of code.

Author:  Kieran [ Sun Nov 28, 2010 8:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Alchemy

You counting comments too? :P

Author:  ctimko [ Fri Jan 14, 2011 11:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Alchemy

Of course. You ALWAYS count comments. Otherwise windows wouldnt be inclusive of some 32 million lines of code.

Author:  losethos [ Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Alchemy

You might be surprised if you think people always inflate and never deflate their line count numbers. In one course, we got graded on a curve on how short our programs were.

You can always talk about binary file size, though data that is not code can distort it.

Basically, you're being childish if you immediately think comments are cheating. That's what a novice programmer might think. Comments are just as much work as code. Line counts are sort-of like "Big O" order of algorithms -- you treat them as a rough estimate. They can be useful. Be mature.

Writing a line of C or a line of assembly is about equal work. You're being a novice to worry about that.

Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group