OS

[Junaid]

Hello

  Where can I download Source code of OS written in VB.

[VE3MTM]

The same place you download the internet

[VoidLogic]

I found one pretty decent one once, it had alot of ASM mixed in tho. Try using Google.

[Dangamoose]

When you find an os that has no inline asm, please tell us, you'd be pretty pushed to find one, even if they exist.

Dangamoose

[ashok s das]

Theoretically it is possible. but in my view VB is not a language for operating system developement. But you can write OS using Qbasic and also be prepared for snatching every bit of hair from ur skin.

[Robert Lee]

Possible? Doubtful. You'd need to support the runtime envirnment of a VB program which is windows. You'd have to re-write windows, then run your VB application on top of that. VB doesn't support inline assembler. You can't compile a VB program to be stand-alone. It will always require the .dll-based runtime library. It can only compile to 32-bit windows executable files for protected mode. The memory model can't be changed. It'll used windows' Flat model (1 4GB segment, paged). You can't remove the equiv of "libc" so expect the program to interact with the envirnment proactively. You'll need support for DDE, the Win32 API, Window procedures, various structures and handles, the clipboard, envirn variables and command-line options in the ussual Windows way. Even things your program itself doesn't use like drag and drop but be supported by the runtime environment to at least a skeleton extent for the VB runtime.

By the time you implimented all this on some non-VB language (like C), your OS would be complete and VERY windows-esk. The VB component would end up being nothing more then a shell.

Same goes for Qbasic to a lesser extent.

-Robert

[Schol-R-LEA]

You can't. There ain't no such animal.

Visual Basic, in any of it's various forms, is an extremely large language (perhaps the largest ever implemented), and is very tightly bound to a complex runtime environment. Even if you were to separate the language from its IDE - which VB.Net does, partially, but only so that it can re-tie it to the .Net Framework stuff - it would still require the equivalent of an OS in runtime suport just to work.

Just to put things in perspective: One of the reasons that so few C++ based OS projects succeed is because the full C++ language requires runtime support for things like exception handling and RTTI. For an amateur OS programmer, these are major obstacles, just on the edge of feasibility; it is mainly because it is possible to use a subset of the language that avoids using them to implement the kernel in, which then can be used to support the full language capabilites, that it is possible at all.

However, while C++ is a large and complex language, it has a relatively small runtime footprint. The runtime requirements for a language like Java, Ada, Smalltalk, or Common Lisp, which implement things like threading, garbage collection and reflective interpretation, are larger than that of C++ by an order of magnitude. VB's runtime requirements, however, are yet another order of magnitude greater than *those*.

This isn't to say that there couldn't be a BASIC-like systems language light and tight enough for OS developemnt; IIRC, Comal was such a language, back in the 1970s. But it would have to be a dialect which you designed and implemented yourself, which is a major undertaking comparable to actually developing an OS. Unless you are truly committed to using a BASIC for systems programming, it simply isn't worth the effort.

[Khumba]

Anyone here seen Oberon?
http://www.oberon.ethz.ch/

Very (totally?) modular, little info I could find on tutorials for the language tho...