On 14 Apr 2007, at 22:38, Rick Chagouri-Brindle wrote:

>
>> You misunderstand the concept here. Operating systems move on and  
>> become
>> more sophisticated. Most good ones move the software writers along  
>> with
>> them. The users buy new versions which take advantage of the new
>> facilities and the whole system moves forward.
>>
>> If you continually make the whole thing backwardly compatible people
>> carry on using the old versions and nothing advances. This is the  
>> state
>> we have arrived at. Some new features never get used which is both a
>> shame and a rebuff for those who worked on the newer ideas. We  
>> need to
>> move forwards.
>>
> Indeed, at some point an Operating System - like any other application
> or process - will lose some elements of its compatibility with earlier
> version/environments.  It is simply the nature of how progress is  
> made.

I personally am very pleased with the way SMSQE contains advances  
such as GD2 colours while still allowing the old colour system to  
work. My program TurboPTR, which produces windows for PE programs was  
amended to allow the new system to be used. It now will work either  
with mode 4 or the GD2 modes. Obviously programs have to be changed  
to use new facilities.

One change I noticed which did stop some programs working related to  
free space. This required a change in The Editor for example. But  
this was minor.

Another change, a long time ago, caused Perfection to stop in certain  
cases. This was traced to a faulty assumption in Perfection about  
register usage in one of the traps. The altered version of the OS was  
quite correct but set a different value in a register marked as "not  
preserved". Obviously such occurrences must be regarded as latent  
errors in the program, not incompatible changes in the OS.

George
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Reply via email to