OMG
Moderator: Moderator Team
OMG
hi,
i did a quick look at the source of react os. It is very awful. Did you ever heard of object oriented programming? Can anybody tell me, why there is no use of classes? Wouldn't it be better to not to copy the ugly sourcecode design of the original microsoft source and instead to improve all the stuff that really sucks at windows, implementing some nice features from other os (e.g. ubuntu, macos x, still with the binary compatibility)?
greetz
i did a quick look at the source of react os. It is very awful. Did you ever heard of object oriented programming? Can anybody tell me, why there is no use of classes? Wouldn't it be better to not to copy the ugly sourcecode design of the original microsoft source and instead to improve all the stuff that really sucks at windows, implementing some nice features from other os (e.g. ubuntu, macos x, still with the binary compatibility)?
greetz
-
- Test Team
- Posts: 802
- Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 2:17 pm
- Contact:
Re: OMG
To answer your questions, point-by-point:
first, most of the devs are of the notion that OO-programming would be a good idea, and would have done it this way were it not for the fact that g++ tends to be very substandard, to say the least. Hence gcc, hence C.
second, the aim of this project is binary compatibility. we're not going to achieve this with implementing features not found in Windows, or attempting to fix "stuff that really sucks at windows", as you put it. The former is pointless if applications written for Windows don't make use of them, the latter will probably break things in the applications written for Windows that depend on them.
If however you're referring to developing a better interface than windows (barring coming up with controls that aren't drop-in replacements to Microsoft's Common Controls), there's an ongoing discussion somewhere in the forums.
first, most of the devs are of the notion that OO-programming would be a good idea, and would have done it this way were it not for the fact that g++ tends to be very substandard, to say the least. Hence gcc, hence C.
second, the aim of this project is binary compatibility. we're not going to achieve this with implementing features not found in Windows, or attempting to fix "stuff that really sucks at windows", as you put it. The former is pointless if applications written for Windows don't make use of them, the latter will probably break things in the applications written for Windows that depend on them.
If however you're referring to developing a better interface than windows (barring coming up with controls that aren't drop-in replacements to Microsoft's Common Controls), there's an ongoing discussion somewhere in the forums.
Re: OMG
Not sure what makes you think that by just doing object oriented the code will somehow be cleaner. In fact, if you overuse it, you end up making things worse.
Re: OMG
What utter drivel...Sunday wrote:hi,
i did a quick look at the source of react os. It is very awful. Did you ever heard of object oriented programming? Can anybody tell me, why there is no use of classes? Wouldn't it be better to not to copy the ugly sourcecode design of the original microsoft source and instead to improve all the stuff that really sucks at windows, implementing some nice features from other os (e.g. ubuntu, macos x, still with the binary compatibility)?
greetz
Maybe if you started your question with a polite 'why does the reactos soure code not use object orientation' then I would have gone on to explain that OO is not necesseraly a good thing and it doesn't lend itself particularly well to operating system design.
However, due to your rudeness, I'm not going to educate you on your misconceptions.
LoneRifle is actually slightly wrong in his answer. We would only use OO is areas that warrant it, like the shell and applications.
For the rest of the OS, we would always use C.
I'll leave you with a little link to ponder over : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/01/21 ... ojects_08/
Re: OMG
Like?implementing some nice features from other os (e.g. ubuntu, macos x
- EmuandCo
- Developer
- Posts: 4731
- Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:52 pm
- Location: Germany, Bavaria, Steinfeld
- Contact:
Re: OMG
If our code is sooo awful, then fix it and file patches into Bugzilla. Thank you
ReactOS is still in alpha stage, meaning it is not feature-complete and is recommended only for evaluation and testing purposes.
If my post/reply offends or insults you, be sure that you know what sarcasm is...
If my post/reply offends or insults you, be sure that you know what sarcasm is...
-
- Developer
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 9:41 pm
- Location: Newbury, UK
- Contact:
Re: OMG
Personally, I'd prefer it if the whole thing were written in C++. I find object-oriented code easier to understand the structure of and generally feel it to be more pleasant to work with.
I mean, Windows even uses objects internally, but uses its own system for handling the objects. It'd feel more natural to express these things using classes and such.
But, I can't force the project to have the whole thing to be rewritten in C++.
So I just follow the project standard coding by using C.
I mean, Windows even uses objects internally, but uses its own system for handling the objects. It'd feel more natural to express these things using classes and such.
But, I can't force the project to have the whole thing to be rewritten in C++.
So I just follow the project standard coding by using C.
Re: OMG
I can at least write my own code for ROS in C++, and have others port it to C if they really want it
Re: OMG
omg, I think I'd die, C++ is so far from OO it may as well be martian.silverblade wrote:Personally, I'd prefer it if the whole thing were written in C++. I find object-oriented code easier to understand the structure of and generally feel it to be more pleasant to work with
C++ is one of the worst languages I've ever had the misfortune to be confused by.
It's so ugly, it's so big and it's so uncontrolled that I bet my house even Bjarne Stroustrup doesn't even fully understand it.
There's a _very_ good reason complex software like operating systems is written in C.
Let's stick to C for low level programming, C# for OO and C++ for the insane
Re: OMG
Actually the core of C++ isn't that far removed from C. What confuses many people is that it is a hybrid language, i.e. it doesn't attempt to be fully linear like C, or fully OO like C#. I will give you that writing a compiler for C++ is a horror compared to many languages (Ada is a breeze). It is however perfectly possible to write a low-level application like an OS kernel with C++, you just need to limit yourself to the (more stable) C-like core and avoid OO. Which is basically how I use C++ all the time
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 47 guests