I don't understand why you still talk about SDF. I think everybody knows
what is it, and why is it.
I'll continue to bring up as long as you continue to suggest that I
created
it for no good reason: Si ignored, and made his own standard - oooh like
Microsoft
I really don't understand
Aley Keprt wrote:
I really don't understand you.
snip
Heh, well the feeling's mutual! }:-
So you admit there're no pubilc utils, and you even not finised
SDF yet. So why you say we don't need any other format (SAD)?
The new SimCoupe itself hasn't even been officially released, so it only
Aley Keprt wrote:
I talked about your disk i/o module, what you programmed to
support DSK and SAD.
You did it on your own, although you could use my source.
Your original addition was just a bolt-on hack to the existing code - the
new code is completely different (also being C++ rather than
Current multi-CPU emulators tend to have a structure full of the CPU
state,
which is effectively treating it as an object. The big difference is that
they're accessing a fixed global location for the structure, and the state
to use is copied in and out of that location around where the CPU
, 2000 4:29 PM
To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
Subject: RE: SAM 2000? To make or not not to make one?
Dnia 00-10-25 [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
Though, I did tend to use Hitech C in CP/M for my SAM
development. Even though it was slow and cumbersome on ProDOS.
Did you try CPM22QED?
I
Aley Keprt wrote:
Okay.
I see we are on the same ship.
*gasps* I think I need a lie down...
Oh, get back to the ground.
I've never heard about CPU as an object.
Current multi-CPU emulators tend to have a structure full of the CPU state,
which is effectively treating it as an object. The
Aley Keprt wrote:
The last big things I added were 32bit sound support, and GZ-packed disk
images
(what Si ignored, and made his own standard - oooh like Microsoft.).
Are you saying that the .SDF format was not needed? Most people prefer
.DSK images for regular format disks (which is the
Dnia 00-10-25 [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
Though, I did tend to use Hitech C in CP/M for my SAM
development. Even though it was slow and cumbersome on ProDOS.
Did you try CPM22QED?
I have Small-C v1.2 with FPC made in 1984. Has someone something
newer?
--
Yarek.
On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Aley Keprt wrote:
So, Watcom might be ANSI, and still not comatible with others. When we
look at it on binary (object file) level.
Silly question maybe, but why would we care about compatability between
compilers' object files if we've got the source?
--
Stuart Brady
Okay, it's 1:1. Who's next.?
2 Against.
make that 3:1 against. I beleive C++ to be over-bloated with stuff not
everyone needs. I've never used the likes of Templates or freindly functions
in my life. In fact, I don't think I have even used operational overloading,
yet. I prefer to use C
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 11:20:26PM +0100, Stuart Brady wrote:
Silly question maybe, but why would we care about compatability between
compilers' object files if we've got the source?
Well, if you have something which takes five hours to compile on
your machine or 20 minutes to download the
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 11:20:26PM +0100, Stuart Brady wrote:
Silly question maybe, but why would we care about compatability between
compilers' object files if we've got the source?
Well, if you have something which takes five hours to compile on
your machine or 20 minutes to download
: Re: SAM 2000?
(Do you know most of the desktop applications and games are now written in
C++?)
make that 3:1 against. I beleive C++ to be over-bloated with stuff not
everyone needs. I've never used the likes of Templates or freindly
functions
in my life. In fact, I don't think I have even used operational
overloading,
yet. I prefer to use C in a tidy, encapsulated way...
You probably
From: Aley Keprt [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You probably missed the lessons I have at university.
Yeah.. I spent to much time surfing the net...
I spent several semesters with object oriented **anything** ;-)))
Don't get me wrong: the theory behind OOP, itself, is exellent. Maybe I am a
From: Aley Keprt [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You probably missed the lessons I have at university.
Yeah.. I spent to much time surfing the net...
I wanted to say 'had', not 'have'.
You probably don't think (as I do) that hi-level programming is generally
better than low-level
Templates, classes, inheritance or at least usage of virtual methods is very
strong tool
for programmers.
Of course, you can do anything like this better or less in C or asm, but if
you are familiar with the theory of OOP,
you have no reason to not use C++.
Agreed. When I'm trying to write
But, how many operating systems and device drivers are built in C++?
(and yes, before you say something, I know that there are a couple...)
This is unfair.
You very probably know than C++ is not intended to be used for writing
device drivers, and saying this.
C++ is for applications, and I
Stuart Brady wrote:
IIRC, SimCoupe has forked into ports for Windows, DOS, Mac, and UNIX.
This is turning into a major problem, IMO.
Well, a temporary fork to be joined back up again. I've stripped it all
down, removed some stuff and added lots more back in. I'm aiming for a
common core set
OK. I admit it. I'm wrong.
-Original Message-
From: Aley Keprt [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[snip stuff about C++ and C]
WOOHOO!! :)
-Original Message-
From: Simon Owen [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 3:37 PM
To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
Subject: RE: SAM 2000?
Stuart Brady wrote:
IIRC, SimCoupe has forked into ports for Windows, DOS, Mac, and UNIX.
This is turning
Aley Keprt wrote:
This is unfair.
You very probably know than C++ is not intended to be used for writing
device drivers, and saying this.
Actually, all but one of my kernel-mode drivers are written in C++! It's
harder work as you have to start by defining your own new/delete operators,
but
Stuart Brady wrote:
IIRC, SimCoupe has forked into ports for Windows, DOS, Mac, and UNIX.
This is turning into a major problem, IMO.
Well, a temporary fork to be joined back up again. I've stripped it all
down, removed some stuff and added lots more back in. I'm aiming for a
common
Aley Keprt wrote:
This is unfair.
You very probably know than C++ is not intended to be used for writing
device drivers, and saying this.
Actually, all but one of my kernel-mode drivers are written in C++! It's
harder work as you have to start by defining your own new/delete
I think the main problem is that there is no official version with new
development.
Look to MAME emulator - people who make ports just take the original version
and do the port.
This is not possible with SimCoupe, since there is no development, and the
sources are
not 100% portable.
There *is*
Aley Keprt wrote:
snip rant
Aley,
Im not offended. Just welcome to my killfile.
Dave.
On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 07:43:03PM +0200, Aley Keprt wrote:
Although some programmers have good experience with C programming, I
must
radically call for C++.
Not only would I not touch C++ with a bargepole, I also use an
application that someone else wrote in C++ and it's a complete
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 10:38:56AM +0100, Ian Collier wrote (again):
Not only would I not touch C++ with a bargepole [snip]
Oi. Someone at mail.vi-internet.de appears to be reposting messages.
Please stop it...
imc
On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Aley Keprt wrote:
Okay, it's 1:1. Who's next.?
2 Against.
Also, C is not so compatible too, since Watcom C - one of the best
compilers - doesn't follow the standard of (all) other compilers.
Then it's not the best compiler. Any decent C compiler should be ANSI
-
From: Dave [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2000 12:41 PM
To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
Subject: SAM 2000?
OK hows about this for a thought.
There are lighter and faster free kernels out there that are GPLed than
the Linux kernel. How enthusiastic would people
interesting idea... I remember mentioning something like this (though, in
a
lot less detail) back in the old days when we were talking about something
called the SamSon...
Unfortunately, I don't think anyone is going to stamp up the money for the
actual computer design. But PC bits and
it is really serious.
I had really enough of these stupid naive mails written by Dave.
Sorry.
-Original Message-
From: Dave [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2000 12:41 PM
To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
Subject: SAM 2000?
OK hows about this for a thought
Message-
From: Aley Keprt [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 12:36 PM
To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
Subject: Re: SAM 2000?
I think our best bet is to forget about the hardware bits and just
concentrate on the kernel and the new SAM OS. Unfortunately
To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
Subject: Re: SAM 2000?
I think our best bet is to forget about the hardware bits and just
concentrate on the kernel and the new SAM OS. Unfortunately, that
would
mean
all the ad-hoc we have to face with the Linux stuff with graphics
drivers,
etc. :( We
I'm afraid I side with Aley. I wouldn't say it's impossible, or even that
hard, if you know what you're doing, but there are loads of drawbacks.
People who want to use the SAM in its own box don't need Ethernet etc etc.
They want a cheap copy of the SAM, no Rage, no 600MHz (what would the point
I'm afraid I side with Aley. I wouldn't say it's impossible, or even that
hard, if you know what you're doing, but there are loads of drawbacks.
People who want to use the SAM in its own box don't need Ethernet etc etc.
They want a cheap copy of the SAM, no Rage, no 600MHz (what would the
the multitude of
graphics cards in the PEEK/POKE way of the SAM!
Justin.
-Original Message-
From: Aley Keprt [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 1:56 PM
To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
Subject: Re: SAM 2000?
OK, Aley. bulky stuff is probably an exaggeration. I
To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
Subject: RE: SAM 2000?
I'm afraid I side with Aley. I wouldn't say it's impossible, or even that
hard, if you know what you're doing, but there are loads of drawbacks.
People who want to use the SAM in its own box don't need Ethernet etc etc.
They want a cheap
On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Aley Keprt wrote:
I've put out of temper, as I read the mail below.
In my opinion, the sad thing is that you actually care about this, Aley.
Dave posts a few bad ideas to sam-users - big deal, eh? I just deleted it.
[snip]
Then we can use SimCoupe. Since SimCoupe is
Then we can use SimCoupe. Since SimCoupe is portable and free (source),
it
is available on any op.system. (At least op.systems which are used by
some programmers, who can make the port.)
IIRC, SimCoupe has forked into ports for Windows, DOS, Mac, and UNIX. This
is turning into a major
Because one port isn't being kept up with the others...
-Original Message-
From: Aley Keprt [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 5:08 PM
To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
Subject: Re: SAM 2000?
Then we can use SimCoupe. Since SimCoupe is portable and free (source
Because one port isn't being kept up with the others...
-Original Message-
From: Aley Keprt [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 5:08 PM
To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
Subject: Re: SAM 2000?
Then we can use SimCoupe. Since SimCoupe is portable and free
On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because one port isn't being kept up with the others...
Exactly. Source code is useful for this, too, BTW. Also, there's no need
to keep the development for each platform seperate: Mozilla is a full
blown web browser that compiles for Windows, OS/2,
On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because one port isn't being kept up with the others...
Exactly. Source code is useful for this, too, BTW. Also, there's no need
to keep the development for each platform seperate: Mozilla is a full
blown web browser that compiles for Windows,
Hello some users (ocassionally Sam users),
I've put out of temper, as I read the mail below.
Please don't read the rest, when you don't like my rude mails.
Aley, why do you keep doing this sort of thing?
I mean, I actually do agree with most of the points you raised but why on
earth do you feel
Hello some users (ocassionally Sam users),
I've put out of temper, as I read the mail below.
Please don't read the rest, when you don't like my rude mails.
Aley, why do you keep doing this sort of thing?
I mean, I actually do agree with most of the points you raised but why on
earth do
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Collier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: SAM 2000?
Hello some users (ocassionally Sam users),
I've put out of temper, as I read the mail below.
Please don't read the rest, when you
OK hows about this for a thought.
There are lighter and faster free kernels out there that are GPLed than
the Linux kernel. How enthusiastic would people be if we specified a
graphics card, a sound card, a chip, a motherboard and a network card
from existing PC specs, chose a freeware kernel and
48 matches
Mail list logo
