dennis@home wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:


"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article om,
"dennis@home" wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article m,
"dennis@home" wrote:

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
-september.

org
...
"dennis@home" wrote:
[snip]
If only Apple had allowed the clones to build Macs back in the
80s

yes we would still be stuck with an OS that didn't even do
virtual memory.
Windows did that for years before macOS.

No that's bull****. It would have been accurate had you said
that Windows
had protected memory before MacOS.

Well that's not surprising.. it wasn't until the 68030 series came
out that there was a working MMU to run the protection and
coincidently support paging and VM.
That is true for Motorola CPUs as used by Apple.

Mmmm no (again). The 030 was the first in the 68k line to have an
*on-board* MMU. You could perfectly well use a 68020 and use the
68851 MMU as a co-processor with it.

Which MacOS used one of those?

The later versions of classic MacOS, with virtual memory, would
certainly have run on an 020 Mac with MMU.

Anyway they didn't work very well.

Do you mean the 020? (Used in the TGV and Eurofighter according to
WinkyPedia). Or the MMU.

Well its pretty obvious from what I wrote.
maybe your MMU is also defunked?


Having written a tiny OS for the 68000 (see
http://www.clothears.org.uk) I can state that it's a much better
processor than the 8086 ever was. Just a shame that the 68008 wasn't
out in time for IBM to use in the original PC instead of the 8088.

AFAICS there wasn't much in it.
I wrote in 8086 assembler for the 8086 board I designed.
It wasn't any more difficult than assembler for the 68000.


That is irrelevant.

What counts is how it could organise memory.

It just meant you had to understand the hardware, something many
programmers didn't.
Including you it appears.


The 80186 board I designed was programmed using PL/M and used RMX86.

It was much easier.

I wrote my own OS for it. RMX86 was a pile of over complicated turds.

However you could get code libraries for it so you didn't have to write
everything again.
Something important in the real world as it meant you could actually
deliver products on time.


The STREAMS drivers and other C code I wrote was horrible to do, C is
the worst language I have used.


Thats because you are a prize ******. I wrote a c library - stdlib -
for mine.

So what?
I didn't reinvent the wheel, I wrote original code.
C is crap, and always will be.


No dennis, you are crap and always will be.

C is the fastest way to write portable assembler than anyone ever came
up with.

The later compilers compiled it into better assembler than most people
could write.

If you had speed issues you were writing it wrong.

I only used assembler to get very weird things done like microkernel
stack flipping for process context switching. Or to squeeze code into a ROM.

If for no other reason than it would have taken me years to write in
assembler what I wrote in 'C' ..in months...