> > > Avoid using ASM in UZIX. It's better for you, it's better for the
> > > system.
> > And it's worse for the speed.
> > Well those things are exactly why I DON'T program for Uzix.
>
> So, forget about programming for MSX due to the speed... Try a
> Pentium III 700MHz...
I don't program MSX for the speed. However, because the MSX is not that
fast, when possible I need all the speed I can get. I think the C language
is too slow for use with MSX, especially for processor-sensitive tasks. Rake
for example a decruncher. If you combine C with ASM (that is, make the
decrunching core ASM and the rest, command line interpretion, etc. in C)
that would be a good solution. But still, the fact remains my knowledge of
C(++) is minimal.
> > > It's perfect when using with a HD. I was impressed when I saw UZIX
> > > running with MegaSCSI. Faster than MSXDOS2.
> > Yeah, right. Using a diskimage of 720k, therefor only benefitting of the
> > speed of the HD. That's not what I have my HD for... then I could as
well
> > use a ramdisk.
>
> Since HD support is not implemented on UZIX, that's the only way
> of running UZIX on a harddisk. In the future, direct access to harddisk
> and partition will be implemented.
But as long as it isn't... You see, I can't stand floppies anymore. They are
sooo slow...
> > > multitasking: UZIX can download a file from funet while you check
> > > your e-mail or visit www.msx.org. DOS can't.
> > It is possible to make such a thing yourself.
>
> AFAIK, it's already done in the 'i' project...
Yes, but that isn't finished yet. The core, which does as described above,
is indeed already finished (which proves also Dos can do multitasking). But
the rest still isn't. That's why I don't want to start with multitasking. It
takes too much time and is very complex. I can always implement it later
(then I will by the way not make a 'dos'-multitasking environment. I will
make my own system only for programs especially made for it. Perhaps some
kind of Dos-box laaaaaater).
> > > C core: it's A LOT easier to find/fix bugs and maintain the code.
> > > No direct access do the hardware: why the BIOS exists????
> > Does the word SLOWWW mean anything to you???
>
> I think you pay too much attention to the word "slow", even when
> it is not a big problem. Slow programs are mainly a problem of no
> code optimization.
I am talking about seeing the screen being constructed in text-modus. I
think that's slow and I really can't stand it. I don't know if Uzix is
faster but at least Dos is just too damn slow.
> > However, still doesn't solve the 720k-problem. And how can I write files
to
> > a disk(image) which is not MSX-DOS compatible?
>
> That's why there is UCP, a MSXDOS executable to read/write UZIX
> disks.
I didn't know about that. Cool.
If there is Sunrise-RS232 support, then I will probably start using Uzix,
for the internet facilities like telnet, mail, irc, icq, etc. However, for
things like downloading files I will still be bound to Uzix' 720k limit
(excluding Uzix and the apps itself), so that won't be any good.
And I don't think I will ever program for Uzix, since as you stated
programming in ASM for Uzix is madness, like shooting a cow with a spoon.
~Grauw
--
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
email me: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or ICQ: 10196372
visit the Datax homepage at http://datax.cjb.net/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and put "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the quotes) in
the body (not the subject) of the message.
Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More information on MSX can be found in the following places:
The MSX faq: http://www.faq.msxnet.org/
The MSX newsgroup: comp.sys.msx
The MSX IRC channel: #MSX on Undernet
****
