From: forgeas@swinjm.UUCP (Jean-Michel Forgeas)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re: Atari Falcon (wasn't: Amiga Falcon)
Date: 6 Apr 92 09:16:52 GMT
 <203600@unix.cis.pitt.edu> <xc0h0!k@lynx.unm.edu> <cj0h+hrcyclone@netcom.com>
 <29504@cbmvax.commodore.com> <mykes.1479@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> <29712@cbmvax.commodore.com>
 <mykes.1651@amiga0
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Organization: The Software Winery

In article <mykes.2019@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG>, Mike Schwartz writes:

> I also DO
> learn the use of all the function calls in the OS.  It is HARD.

It is normal, learning new things is hard and requires time.

> many of the OS function calls require you to call a bunch of others to
> make it work.

Fortunately each OS call is a part of a harmonious multi-purpose system.

> But there are huge advantages to writing your own function calls instead
> of just using existing functions.

It depends on the function call, and on the application you are doing, and
under which environnement your application runs, and on the total time you
have to do the application, etc...

> When =RJ= programs the Amiga these days, he uses his own enhanced
> and improved windowing system,

I'd like very much to see this, how can I ?

> If I have to add an OpenLibrary() call and do error checking for it in
> my program, that's stuff that has ZERO to do with the guts of my application.

Yes it has to do with your application because the way the system works
(no absolute address unless one...) has so many other advantages that you
certainely are happy with them and 'jsr ...' and 'tst.l' seem jokes.

> I choose the Amiga
> because I CAN diddle the parallel port hardware with a handful of instructions
> (WITHOUT using the OS) instead [...]
> I'll also diddle the parallel port in assembly or 'C' without using
> the parallel.device [...]

So you seem to write generalities about programing the Amiga, but you
have a very specific use of your Amiga, and a very specific way of
programming it.
When you write something about the OS, it seems that you always think
about the same type (yours) of application in your mind.
Since when I read your postings I attach (as for others postings) their
meaning to standard Amiga types of applications, this creates confusion...

Can you say that all what you wrote in this posting applies to an
application displaying interactive graphics (font sensitive gadgets,
lists, ...) into a resizable window which opens on the Workbench
screen (can be obscured by other windows), with an ARexx port, a
clipboard handling, using user keymap, and having other user's
applications running at the same time?
I think that you cannot say that.

> Imagine the guts of DPaint
> in ROM. [...] And DPaint can still get better since
> you can do SetFunction() or SetPatch.

It's hard to follow you: you wrote above (I didn't quote it) that:
    "Also, an OS routine that is in ROM is permanent and can't be enhanced
     without replacing the ROM" (<mykes.1651@amiga0.SF> line 133)
And now you write the opposite. Or did I miss the context ?

> I'll publish my 'C' multitasking kernel for the Sega right here, since
> it is so small and trivial (also maybe others will enjoy it):

Seems very nice and (for me) not trivial at all !
Thank you very much for this code.

Best regards,
    Jean-Michel
--
Jean-Michel Forgeas
cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmfra!swinjm!forgeas