From: fontenot@ravl.rice.edu (Dwayne Jacques Fontenot)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mud.lp
Subject: Re: MudOS a ripoff?
Date: 27 Aug 1992 05:22:20 GMT
Organization: Rice University

In article <geoff.714882644@bruce.cs.monash.edu.au> geoff@cs.monash.edu.au (Geoff Wong) writes:
>jlw@HEBREW.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (James Waldrop) writes:
>
>>Several changes to the object struct, and a few to the sval struct
>
>Wow! - Hours of hard work and a complete re-writing; obviously.

Why are you immediately being belligerent?

>>A completely rewritten eval_instruction (it uses pointers to functions
>>  instead of the large switch())
>
>Yawn - I did that 18 months ago. It's irrelevant anyway - a good
>compiler (gcc 2.0+) will do the job automatically anyway. Simply makes
>the code easier to work on.

Good for you. Did you release it? I have not seen it.
Guess what? Not everybody has gcc 2.0+, or a good compiler even. I am sure
you do...once again, good for you.

"Simply makes the code easier to work on"...simply. Can't have that, can
we? Ho Hum.

>>Our own version of mappings, mainly snagged from Perl
>>Wrappers around malloc(), realloc(), and free() which allow keeping
>>  track of memory (for a small overhead)
>
>Hot stuff! Catching up with the Joneses.

Have the Joneses released their code? I have not seen the malloc stuff
in another released driver. And some mappings are better than others.

>>A change in the way objects compile to allow 'true' virtual objects
>>A file is read in to set certain parameters that used to be #defined
>>Several more calls to master.c at various points
>>Many many changes to efuns...

I notice you say nothing about the virtual objects. But, perhaps they are
not even worth your comment. Ho Hum after all.

>Changing/adding efuns does not change the basic structure of the
>driver. The only real reason to add efuns is for added speed
>in critical regions or to cope with such wide spread usage that a library
>function is inappropriate.

ooh, but some of those efuns are Oh So Cool (TM).

>>When the name changed to MudOS, I was of the opinion that it was a
>>bit premature.  As things stand now, though, I think it is undoubtedly
>>a wholly different driver. 
>
>I doubt it - still uses the same string hashing, same backend, 
>same chained hash tables for objects etc.

If you are referring to 0.8.14, then you are correct...but 0.8.52 is
quite a different beast. Quite different indeed. If you are really
interested (which you, Mr. Wong are not) come to TMI and read the
ChangeLog, or wait for the release announcement.

>Simply your arrogance in thinking you've produced a new
>product has caused you to change it's name.

No, that is not it. How would you know that? But then...you know quite
a bit about arrogance.

>I doubt whether your changes are particularily significant.

Thank you so much for telling me your doubts...your...uninformed doubts.
They will be of great use to us in many areas, I am sure.

> Certainly not
>a "new" mud started from scratch - hence it doesn't really deserve
>a name change.

hence, QED, therefore, ipso facto...yeh, right. Who made this Law of Nature?

>geoff
>--
>Ho Hum.
>The vorpal blade went snicker-snack.

go ahead. do what you do Oh So Well (TM).

Dwayne Fontenot (Jacques@TMI)