Hi!
It looks like Microsoft is moving ( with its new
operating system codename Longhorn) to completely
managed code( see reports from their PDC).
What does that mean for D? Will D compilers translate
code to MSIL(microsoft intermediate language) to be
excecuted by their virtual machine (CLR)?

Albin

"completely managed code" isn't true, but Longhorn clearly increases the focus on managed code even more.

D has been designed as a "systems" language (a "replacement" for traditional C/C++).  MSIL/CLR/.NET has been suggested before, but seems to be against the "systems" nature of D.

   Dan

"Albin Pucnik" <albin.pucnik@guest.arnes.si> wrote in message news:bno9i3$2cd$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Hi!
> It looks like Microsoft is moving ( with its new
> operating system codename Longhorn) to completely
> managed code( see reports from their PDC).
> What does that mean for D? Will D compilers translate
> code to MSIL(microsoft intermediate language) to be
> excecuted by their virtual machine (CLR)?
>
> Albin
>

So there is no place for D in the managed world of Longhorn?

Bine

J. Daniel Smith wrote:
> "completely managed code" isn't true, but Longhorn clearly increases the
> focus on managed code even more.
> 
> D has been designed as a "systems" language (a "replacement" for traditional
> C/C++).  MSIL/CLR/.NET has been suggested before, but seems to be against
> the "systems" nature of D.
> 
>    Dan

A managed version of D is probably doable with enough resources.
His point I guess, is that managed code don't sound like it's any good for
the efficiency necessary for a systems language. I haven't read anything
about Longhorn yet, so I should probably not comment any further. But
I can't let go; It would probably be excessively stupid by MS to drop
support for their C API with 10+ years of legacy application code.

Lars Ivar Igesund

"Albin Pucnik" <albin.pucnik@guest.arnes.si> wrote in message news:bnonf7$l90$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> So there is no place for D in the managed world of Longhorn?
>
> Bine
>
> J. Daniel Smith wrote:
> > "completely managed code" isn't true, but Longhorn clearly increases the focus on managed code even more.
> >
> > D has been designed as a "systems" language (a "replacement" for
traditional
> > C/C++).  MSIL/CLR/.NET has been suggested before, but seems to be
against
> > the "systems" nature of D.
> >
> >    Dan
>

It may also be stupid for MS to create an OS that can't be booted to a command-prompt interface.

In article <bnoo2j$m3f$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Lars Ivar Igesund says...
>
>A managed version of D is probably doable with enough resources.
>His point I guess, is that managed code don't sound like it's any good for
>the efficiency necessary for a systems language. I haven't read anything
>about Longhorn yet, so I should probably not comment any further. But
>I can't let go; It would probably be excessively stupid by MS to drop
>support for their C API with 10+ years of legacy application code.
>
>Lars Ivar Igesund
>
>"Albin Pucnik" <albin.pucnik@guest.arnes.si> wrote in message news:bnonf7$l90$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> So there is no place for D in the managed world of Longhorn?
>>
>> Bine
>>
>> J. Daniel Smith wrote:
>> > "completely managed code" isn't true, but Longhorn clearly increases the focus on managed code even more.
>> >
>> > D has been designed as a "systems" language (a "replacement" for
>traditional
>> > C/C++).  MSIL/CLR/.NET has been suggested before, but seems to be
>against
>> > the "systems" nature of D.
>> >
>> >    Dan
>>
>
>

In article <bnoo2j$m3f$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Lars Ivar Igesund says...
>
>A managed version of D is probably doable with enough resources.
>His point I guess, is that managed code don't sound like it's any good for
>the efficiency necessary for a systems language. I haven't read anything
>about Longhorn yet, so I should probably not comment any further. But
>I can't let go; It would probably be excessively stupid by MS to drop
>support for their C API with 10+ years of legacy application code.

I agree with this.  Probably the upper layers like the shell will be written in managed code.  But I can't imagine that the low level stuff would not have have C APIs.

If D is a "systems" language, why does it have garbage collection (that can't be turned off) ? It does not seem that I can make an O/S using D...

"J. Daniel Smith" <J_Daniel_Smith@HoTMaiL.com> wrote in message news:bnogok$c1j$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "completely managed code" isn't true, but Longhorn clearly increases the focus on managed code even more.
>
> D has been designed as a "systems" language (a "replacement" for
traditional
> C/C++).  MSIL/CLR/.NET has been suggested before, but seems to be against the "systems" nature of D.
>
>    Dan
>
> "Albin Pucnik" <albin.pucnik@guest.arnes.si> wrote in message news:bno9i3$2cd$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > Hi!
> > It looks like Microsoft is moving ( with its new
> > operating system codename Longhorn) to completely
> > managed code( see reports from their PDC).
> > What does that mean for D? Will D compilers translate
> > code to MSIL(microsoft intermediate language) to be
> > excecuted by their virtual machine (CLR)?
> >
> > Albin
> >
>
>

You should not underestimate the efficiency of C# and the CLR. Comparisons (in windows::developer network) show that it can be much more efficient than current c or C++ - depending on the quality of the libraries etc.

Ch.

"Lars Ivar Igesund" <larsivi@stud.ntnu.no> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:bnoo2j$m3f$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> A managed version of D is probably doable with enough resources.
> His point I guess, is that managed code don't sound like it's any good for
> the efficiency necessary for a systems language. I haven't read anything
> about Longhorn yet, so I should probably not comment any further. But
> I can't let go; It would probably be excessively stupid by MS to drop
> support for their C API with 10+ years of legacy application code.
>
> Lars Ivar Igesund
>
> "Albin Pucnik" <albin.pucnik@guest.arnes.si> wrote in message news:bnonf7$l90$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > So there is no place for D in the managed world of Longhorn?
> >
> > Bine
> >
> > J. Daniel Smith wrote:
> > > "completely managed code" isn't true, but Longhorn clearly increases
the
> > > focus on managed code even more.
> > >
> > > D has been designed as a "systems" language (a "replacement" for
> traditional
> > > C/C++).  MSIL/CLR/.NET has been suggested before, but seems to be
> against
> > > the "systems" nature of D.
> > >
> > >    Dan
> >
>
>

In article <bnot23$tgg$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Achilleas Margaritis says...
>
>If D is a "systems" language, why does it have garbage collection (that can't be turned off) ? It does not seem that I can make an O/S using D...
>
you can turn on and off the gc, no problem. don't bitch on D if you don't know d.

import gc;
gc.disable();
gc.enable();

and for most stuff, even system stuff, gc is not something hurting at all. a potential memory leak is much more hurting. think of some service you set up that runs 24/7 and happens to leak memory on say a daily basis.. have fun debugging while waiting several days each time to actually measure that you leaked..

even microsoft is not sure yet how to bugfix exchange 2000 to not leak anymore and eat up ram more and more.

system level stuff has to be good performing, sure. but it definitely have to be save. thats priority and THE reason why the gc is around everything. savety.

"Achilleas Margaritis" <axilmar@in.gr> wrote in message news:bnot23$tgg$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> If D is a "systems" language, why does it have garbage collection (that can't be turned off) ? It does not seem that I can make an O/S using D...


There's a OS kernel writen in D at http://www.geocities.com/one_mad_alien/dkernel.html

Haven't tried it thought.