When I started this, I considered writing it I rust. However, I really wanted this to be the tutorial I would have wanted to read several years ago when I first developed an interest in OS, and a "modern" system language like zig or rust would have hurt that goal.

Because real programmers don't use such tools?

What? No. Because way more people know C than rust. I wanted to be able to reach a wider audience. I know I would have looked elsewhere if I saw found this but I didn't know the language.

There is ATS for the task, with all the C features plus proofs, quantified constraints, dependent types, linear types, interface for pluggable SAT solvers and so much more.

https://bluishcoder.co.nz/tags/ats/index.html

Apparently this is the shill-c-alternatives thread. Here's a short list:

* Rust

* D

* Zig

* C2

* Nim

* LISP

* Ante

* Clay

Please note: I think all of the above languages (with the exception of C2) are awesome and should be looked at.

* Myrddin

* Terra

LISP Is Systems Programming

or, if you want,

LISP: Loses In Systems Programming

LISP machines?

You forgot

- Ada

- SPARK

- Modula-2

- Modula-2+

- Modula-3

- Oberon

- Oberon-2

- Oberon-07

- Component Pascal

- Active Oberon

- Dylan

- Object Pascal

- Sing#

- System C#

- Swift

- C++ (assuming C++17)

Then the older than C, or about the same age.

- ESPOL

- NEWP

- PL/I

- PL/M

- PL/S

- PL/8

- Mesa

- Mesa/Cedar

- Algol68-W

These are the most well known ones.

Plenty of material to learn for anyone that anyone with interest in systems programming and how it evolved since 1960.

I'm talking about legit languages people are proposing to replace C with that are actually any good (except C2, it was an afterthought and I regret it because it was out of place and unlike the other languages there purposeless). Ada and perhaps C++17 is the only language people are actually recommending to replace C.

Yeah, given the current market situation, you are right.

However, there are quite a few lessons on the manuals, papers and sample code from those languages, to learn about other approaches of doing systems programing.

Lessons that one can bring back to life.

For example, are you aware that ESPOL, the systems programming language for the Burroughs B5500 in 1961, about 10 years before C was created, already had the concept of UNSAFE code blocks?

Burroughs B5500 is still sold nowadays as Unisys ClearPath mainframe.

Or that IBM implemented their research OS and compiler toolchain for their very first RISC processor in PL/8, a safe systems programming language, using a compiler architecture similar to how LLVM looks like?

IBM mainframes still use PL/I variants, although new systems code is a mix of C and C++.

So plenty of ideas there to learn, even if no one is going to start writing new code in those languages.

> Ada and perhaps C++17 is the only language people are actually recommending to replace C.

I would still add Swift to that list, even if that turns out to be just like Objective-C, mainly specific to Apple platforms. Given Apple's roadmap for it.

Swift is more applications programming than OS or systems. It does have those capabilities, but no one is using it for that and it's not really the intent.

However, to the extent that swift (and obj-c!) are used for systems programming, those programs are useable outside of apple platforms.

It is definitely the intent of Apple, explicitly mentioned on their developer documentation as C and Objective-C replacement.

"Swift is a successor to both the C and Objective-C languages."

https://developer.apple.com/swift/

As mentioned in another comment, most of the time the issue is political, not technical.

Swift? I know Apple says they intend it to be usable for OS development, but I would want to see some real OS work (either from them or from others) before being convinced it is a real contender (or is there, and did I miss it?)

Officially launchd and the Dock are now written in Swift (disclosed at WWDC 2017), so even though they aren't drivers or something, they are already a bit lower level than just apps.

Swift 4.0 got all the Unsafe* APIs stabilized, maybe they would be using it a bit more.

In any case, Apple also suffers an Objective-C vs Swift, just like Microsoft used to have C# (Longhorn, Singularity, Midori) vs C++.

Which means, even if it possible to use a certain language from technology point of view, many political wars have to be won as well.

I don't know if this is my conservatism speaking or not, but one problem I see with this approach is that you wouldn't learn as much because more batteries are included. Having to implement more than just a kernel (like the standard library and userland) gives you more of a chance to learn intangibles like what is or isn't appropriate to include in an API or what programs will actually be useful given your overall design. Also, there could be the problem of not having as many resources available in the language you're writing your OS in. That's a huge deal for a less experienced programmer.

That all being said, Zig looks pretty okay. It would be a good candidate to write an OS if you had to because the standard library looks trivially portable so you could test the userland on a known working kernel before getting it working on your new kernel.

As an alternative to this you could use Nim[1] which compiles to C. If you, like myself, dislike C, Nim can be used as a "better C" (you can disable the Nim GC and forget about its standard library, then use Nim as a thin layer over C with modules, generics and other nice goodies)

1 - https://nim-lang.org/

I’ve been wanting to learn how to use a real programming language (I’m strictly front-end languages) and Nim looks great at first glance.

Other point of view, would be to consider that the language runtime is the OS being implemented.

Why not Rust? Or, say, Ada?

Or go all the way and design a new language too!

Ah, the Knuthian approach. Why not go more than all the way and design an architecture too?

That would be to just use Assembly, given Mix.

Assembler is too high level these days. This would be translator from higher languages to hardware.

http://conal.net/papers/compiling-to-categories/

https://icfp17.sigplan.org/event/icfp-2017-papers-kami-a-pla...

Thanks for the reading material, quite interesting.

I think you are right, recently I saw an Arduino-like projects book, but using VHDL instead, which somehow pointed into this direction.