Is there any OS not written in C?

>>51
Needs more codes tags. IHBTA

>>52
*code

>>44
What has been seen cannot be unseen.
The viral nature of proprietary software has infected me.

Haiku is written in C++.

>>54
at least you're not required to distribute it now like you would be if it were that viral GNU diarrhea.

>>54
Never forget the concepts of fair use, trivial samples (a trivial hello world program, a trivial section of a larger work) and the fact that copyright only covers the specific implementation of an expression and not the expression itself.

>>57
The power of the imaginary property compels you.

Anything worth mentioning is written in C.

Which kinda blows because I have to deal with primitive C retardation when doing my operating systems course projects.

you cant write an OS in anything other than C because you need to bootstrap the system somehow

if you think C is primitive then drop out of school because you wont be able to take it in the real world

>>60
IHBT, but how does that limit the language used?

>>61
If you think C isn't primitive, you belong in the 1950s.

>>63
it isnt primitive, it gives the programmer all the tools he needs to do anything he wants. if you cant handle that, then youre a primitive programmar and should stick with ruby programmering on your rails

>>63
Protip: There was no C in the 1950s.

>>63
Protip: There was no C in the 1950s.

>>66
So they did not think C was primitive. >>63 is right, you know that?

>>64
It's primitive and doesn't even have usable macros.

>>65,66
No shit. The point is that C lacks basic features that predate it by decades.

>>68
I've been programming C since the early 80s and can safely say the macros work fine. Perhaps you should stick to programming toy programs in FIOC.

>>68
The point is that C lacks basic features that predate it by decades.
C was designed to be a minimalist language that was easily portable. Complain all you want that it lacks features, but it takes a long time for any feature to gain widespread adoption(see Garbage Collection) and why bother including non-mainstream features in a language that is designed to be as small as possible.

(see Garbage Collection)
See LISP

>>70
C could have at least included keyword arguments and useful macros (no, >>69, the macros do not work fine: there's no way to put logic in your code generation).

>>44
what.
why would they not just do this instead?
int ntoi(char *p, int base)
{ register int i = 0, fFound = 0;
  if(1 < base && base < 37)
    for(register int c;
        fFound |= (isdigit(c = tolower(*p++)) &&
                   (c -= c <= '9' ? '0' : 'a' - 10) < base);
        i = i * base + c);
  return fFound ? i : -1; }

((no, >>69, the macros do not work fine: there's no way to put logic in your code generation)
if you use gcc, there is.

>>74
If I used gcc, I would have two problems.

But explain yourself anyway.

>>75
#ifdef

>>76
I'm talking about proper meta-programming logic, not your mickey mouse conditional ifs.

>meta
Back to /b/, please

>>78

You don't know what meta means in this context, get the fuck off /prog/

>>76
Oh, wow. That's what you think code generation is?

>>79
Please don't feed the troll

>>72,79
enjoy your infinite compile times with your touring-complete macros.

>>82
What about my touring-complete macros?

>>83
enjoy them

>>84
I will, along with my job.

>>85
Sick burn, I literally saw the smoke from the of the thread list. Nice one

>>85
XDDD XFD LOOL ROLFLOL A GRAT BIG ONE XD

>>85
you enjoy writing java?

>>86-88
We are being trolled at the rate of an Ackermann function for which m = 5 and n is the independent variable.

>>79
meta in the context of macros
Sepples STL

>>89
We need a script to hide troll posts.

>>89
Jesus fuck I'm not sure I can handle that.

>>91
But then the room would be empty.

>>93
And thus, I would be enlightened.

bump

>>95
Now that you've bumped it, I feel compelled to respond to some posts:

>>60
Nonsense, you can write it in whatever language you want, as long as you extend the language to be able to emit lower-level code too (such as asm), or link to asm somehow. The usual idea when writing an OS in a language that was not originally meant to be used for such purposes is to simply extend it to have a low-level layer library, possibly something for emitting assembly code for the target platform, and preferably a native compiler for your language. Others have also tried doing this in another way: compile to bytecode, and make the VM that interpreters or JITs that bytecode, or even make a CPU(or program a microcoded CPU) whose machine code is the same as the bytecode. It's also true that some languages may be badly designed and unsuitable for OS design(I shudder at the thought of a PHP OS for example), but most well-designed languages should be usable with some extensions.
>>82
Well designed real macros aren't really that slow, and compile times tend to be reasonable, and unlike edit,compile&link languages, languages which have real macros usually allow you to dynamically recompile any function you want, which makes the cost considerably smaller. It also makes live patching of the OS, kernel or any application a painless procedure - no more bringing down the system to do updates.

or even make a CPU(or program a microcoded CPU) whose machine code is the same as the bytecode
This has been done with Java. All it is is a CPU with a super-CISC instruction set, if you think about it.

>>97
Yes, I've seen some Java CPUs, which are even open-source, and  the Lisp Machine CPUs which were microcoded, and source is also available.