1. 20
  1. 4

    Home-grown OSs seem a great way to scratch the itch of wanting a system that you can understand every level of … much better IMHO than resurrecting old systems like CP/M or the NES. Modern ISAs are so much nicer to work with than the 6502 or Z-80, you don’t have to sweat to shoehorn everything into 64KB, and of course you can use higher level languages.

    If I were doing this it’d be fun to have a little kernel with a little Forthlike interpreter on it, then build higher levels in that.

    1. 2

      I’d target m68k (friendliest ISA ever) or RISC-V (the future).

      IBM PC is overrated as target.

      1. 2

        Not if you want to actually buy hardware it’s not.

        1. 1

          You’d end up using an emulator with IBM PC, because the hardware support isn’t there.

    2. 2

      MIT license, I like it.

      What is the design like? It seems like I’m expected to read the source code just to figure out the basic overall architecture. A diagram wouldn’t have hurt.

      1. 2

        It seems like I’m expected to read the source code just to figure out the basic overall architecture…

        This seems to be common in OS dev in general, alas. :-(

      2. 1

        Thanks for sharing! This aligns perfectly with my current interest.