Newsgroups: comp.sys.acorn
Subject: Re: Yet more grumbles about Acorn (Was Re: The draw format and Acorn)
From: banksie@khantazi.welly.gen.nz (Philip R. Banks)
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 21:21:40 +1200
Reply-To: banks_p@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
 <18Z8zIj013n@khantazi.welly.gen.nz> <1992Apr8.094928.24324@doc.ic.ac.uk>
Organization: My Arc.

ijp@doc.ic.ac.uk (Ian Palmer) writes:

> In article <18Z8zIj013n@khantazi.welly.gen.nz> banks_p@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
> >
> >   Perhaps you might consider that fact that Acorn have yet to release RO3
> >for machines *other* than the A5000.
> 
> So?

  So! SO!?! RO3 is currently (well the official version anyway) somewhat
A5000 hardware specific. As I understand it work is being done on making it
work on non A5000 platforms.

> O.K. lets assume a company bring out a package, say a desktop
> publishing package (for sake of argument) and they sell it openly for
> one computer. Someone opens their new package and finds that there are
> no instructions. They write to the company asking for the instructions
> and the company state that they are busilly porting the software for
> other computers, and fixing bugs in the package, and will only release
> the instruction when all that is completed (even though there will be
> absolutly no change to the functionallity of the package). 

   Get your analogy closer to the truth. The package comes supplied with
instructions on how to *use* it but no technical documentation on how to
program/extend it.

> With the case of RO3 there isn't even a real case of porting it for
> other computers, as I would assume that it was created to work on all
> Arcs, not just the A5000. Fixing bugs makes no difference to what to
> change, are Acorn going to suddenly change all the SWI names?
> Change that *FX162 no longer writes to cmos RAM but instead formats
> your hard disc. 

   You assume incorrectly. Various sections of the code will have been
recoded in a hardware specific way first. Why? To take advantage of the new
features the hardware offers. As I understand it (and it is only an
understanding) work is being done on taking the new features in the OS
supported by the new hardware and defining interfaces to them so that
programs do *not* have to be aware of the changes in hardware. (Oh yes and
it must be backwards compatible with old code too....) So that the new
features are still offered on older hardware. (transparently as all good
OS's should do.)

> They already did that with the A5000 remember. 

   How could I forget? However the RO3 in the 5000 is still under
development. It is not yet fully finalised for the *whole* Arc range. Until
it is there will presumably be no programming documentation.

> I did not touch your sig file, I mearly read it and noticed it's
> sentiment which I though was appropriate. If you don't want anyone to
> read your sig file, don't post it around the world.

    Two points spring to mind :-

 1) Ian don't be a jerk. My sig file is my sig file. It usually has little
to no relavence to any posting I make. It is there for other reasons.

 2) Netiquitte specifies that you should not copy sigs in your follow up
postings and avoid uneccesary quoting to conserve net bandwidth. Being at
the far end of a 2400 baud modem I appreciate this point *alot*.

    Philip

--
Philip R. Banks                                                         @@@@@/|
Syntax: mail <banks_p@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz|banksie@khantazi.welly.gen.nz> @@@@/#|
                                                                        @@@/##|
What price the crown of a king on his throne,                           @@/---|
When you're chained in the dark all alone?  ---A.P.P.                   @/    |