I went through the process of 16 bit DOS programs with similar
segmentation  limits to the issues I run into on creating large 
programs on Palm OS.   The reason my (DOS) applications
don't port to 32 bit Windows is because the operating system is
dramatically different, not because the Pentium is different from 
8088, or because 16 bit segments aren't needed on 32 bit processors.

It would have been possible to create 32 bit DOS, but nasty
because of all the lowel level assumptions within the operating system
created by the lack of a sufficiently abstract API set.

Basically it's entirely the problem of the guys who write the compilers 
and the guys who create and maintain the OS's API set.
The application coder SHOULDN'T have any idea of program 
segmentation and 32KB jump limits, etc.   If this is all handled by the 
compiler (as it almost is using CodeWarrior) then when moving to
a processor with true 32 bit addressing, all that should be required
is a recompile and relink with the correct compiler settings.

But if you are one of the souls writing code with "jump islands",
explicit register allocations, etc., then moving to a different processor
is going to be rough, because you'll have to rip out all the stuff
that compiler should have been handling for you all along.

And the big-endian, little-endian issue is only a problem if if really
matters (within your code) which end is up.  If so, encapsulate that
code, don't replicate it.

The big issue on the Palm OS in moving forward is to maintain
compatibility in the OS API's.   If they do that, then migrating 
existing applications forward will be relatively easy even to
processors quite alien to the DragonBall.  

I think the biggest issue will be taking most current applications
to a different screen profile.   The 160x160 is specifically coded into
most software.  If Palm OS's primary plaform suddenly had a
320x480 screen (not a bad idea!), we'd all find our code running
in the top left corner (or what ever the default would be for 
the current apps)

Roger Stringer
(Glad to programming in C++ in CodeWarrier on Windows!)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Subject: Re: End Of Dragonball? Palm Shakeup?
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Sokolov)
>Date: Tue, 25 Apr 00 12:13:20 CDT

>Michael S. Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> I wonder how this will effect the development platforms.  Specifically
>> will this new processor require new GCC and prc-tools setup to be able
>> to develop for the new processor?

>I doubt that you will even have PRCs on any other processor. The very design of
>the PalmOS memory architecture is practically defined by the properties,
>peculiarities, and limitations of the 68000/Dragonball. Why does PalmOS have
>the notion of memory "cards"? AFAIK because the Dragonball does. Why is
>everything in PalmOS (chunks, records, resources, you name it) designed around
>the 64 KB limit? Probably because of the -32 KB to +32 KB locality of reference
>limit in the 68000. Where does this whole notion of segments come from? From
>there.

>With any other processor the entire PalmOS memory architecture, as well as the
>database architecture and whatever will replace the PRCs will have to be
>redesigned from scratch. And so of course will all development tools. And so
>will all PalmOS software that is even a tiny little bit hacky.

>--
>Michael Sokolov                Harhan Engineering Laboratory
>-


-- 
For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see 
http://www.palm.com/devzone/mailinglists.html

Reply via email to