Timo Kreuzer wrote: > Wine emulates the kernel through a server. Of cause we don't use it, > because it has a totally different design.
Says who? So far, and only counting official implementations, Win32 has been implemented as: - a shared-memory user mode subsystem (Windows 95, 98) - a RPC user mode subsystem (Windows NT 3) - a kernel mode subsystem (Windows NT 4 and later) - ??? (Windows CE) > We have an NT kernel and > every kernel developer would eat me alive if I tried to put a single > line of wine code into our kernel. It's considered crap there. Wine code has to pass quality reviews and test suites. ReactOS code only has to pass the warmth-and-fuzziness test. Wine can prove their code is right, ReactOS is based on code that feels right The idea that Wine code is better than ReactOS code really needs to die. Compared to theirs, our code is sloppy, highly unprofessional and often inexplicable. We copy the form but tend to completely miss the intent. Wine development is test-driven and entirely based on intent and end results, while our development model is, apparently, to dick around in our spare time pretending we work at Microsoft > How do you expect display drivers to work at all? NT display drivers used to run in user mode with the same identical API, and probably the same ABI. I'm sure Aleksey will do just fine > More hacks on top of the huge pile of hacks? And how do you deal with > missing functionality in wine code? Shove more code in there? Or ignore > it, like if wine doesn't need it, we also don't need it? Or again fork > the code? I would sell my mother to Carthage for even a fraction of the kind of application support that Wine enjoys, thank you. My only gripe with arwinss is that Aleksey beat me to the first landmark controversial side project _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Rosemail@example.com http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev