Norman Dunbar wrote:
On 27/01/11 15:48, gdgqler wrote:
Of course. but why at runtime?
Code reuse and/or share-ability. If you have 10 applications running and
each one needs the same library code, isn't it much better to have one
copy used by all, rather than running the system with
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Norman Dunbar nor...@dunbar-it.co.ukwrote:
I may regret starting this, but as the subject says, what would you like
to see in QDOSMSQ given that we were starting from scratch with the
intention of writing a completely new OS?
I'd like to see:
A block sound
On 27 Jan 2011, at 16:07, Norman Dunbar wrote:
Of course. but why at runtime?
Code reuse and/or share-ability. If you have 10 applications running and
each one needs the same library code, isn't it much better to have one
copy used by all, rather than running the system with 10 copies of
On 27 Jan 2011, at 17:23, Norman Dunbar wrote:
One thing I would like to see in SMSQ is the correct MC680xx vector
table at the start of the OS.
Is this because some of the space is taken up with QDOS vectors thus covering
up some of the Motorola exception vectors? The solution is to use
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 5:08 AM, gdgqler gdgq...@gmail.com wrote:
Compilation by TURBO allows solution of another problem which how to use
another routine if the one you want is not loaded on your machine.
Apologies for the off-topicness, but one thing I'd like to see from Turbo or
other
Hi George,
Is this because some of the space is taken up with QDOS vectors thus covering
up some of the Motorola exception vectors? The solution is to use the VBR to
relocate the exception vectors (possible with 68020+).
Yes indeed, this is why. However, the solution still doesn't allow
In message 4d415c3e.2020...@dunbar-it.co.uk, Norman Dunbar
nor...@dunbar-it.co.uk writes
Hi Norman,
Something for everyone ... :-)
All of the things that you list are quite technical considerations.
Most users you want something that does something very well without them
having to bother
I may regret starting this, but as the subject says, what would you like
to see in QDOSMSQ given that we were starting from scratch with the
intention of writing a completely new OS?
Disclaimer: No, I'm NOT thinking of writing one!
For me, the following:
* Ability to hook into the OS from any
On 27 Jan 2011, at 11:51, Norman Dunbar wrote:
I may regret starting this, but as the subject says, what would you like
to see in QDOSMSQ given that we were starting from scratch with the
intention of writing a completely new OS?
Disclaimer: No, I'm NOT thinking of writing one!
For me,
Hi George,
* A windowing system that is simple to use. From any language.
This also is true of SMSQE
Is it?
* Libraries that applications can link to at run time, as opposed to
static linking at compile time.
How would that work? If I write a program I like to know in advance what it
On 27 Jan 2011, at 15:18, Norman Dunbar wrote:
* Libraries that applications can link to at run time, as opposed to
static linking at compile time.
How would that work? If I write a program I like to know in advance what it
will contain
True, but lets say you have a graphics application
On 27/01/11 15:48, gdgqler wrote:
Of course. but why at runtime?
Code reuse and/or share-ability. If you have 10 applications running and
each one needs the same library code, isn't it much better to have one
copy used by all, rather than running the system with 10 copies of the
same code? That
One thing I would like to see in SMSQ is the correct MC680xx vector
table at the start of the OS.
:-)
--
Norman Dunbar
Dunbar IT Consultants Ltd
Registered address:
Thorpe House
61 Richardshaw Lane
Pudsey
West Yorkshire
United Kingdom
LS28 7EL
Company Number: 05132767
13 matches
Mail list logo
