Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: potential PPC Amiga REAL CHEAP  (Read 141374 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: potential PPC Amiga REAL CHEAP
« on: March 30, 2005, 11:51:32 AM »
@whoever bloodline was replying to

It's clear you don't understand where current PC hardware is at.

We each have our preferences, personally I prefer (for various reasons) PPC over x86, but I'd never suggest for a second that the current generation PC hardware was fundamentally crap, flawed or inefficient.

Lastly, you seem to refer to PC and x86 as interchanagable terms. This is like saying 680x0 and amiga (or apple) are interchangable. Just as many 680x0 based systems have moved towards PPC, so the PC has moved to a 64-bit clean architecture in the guise of AMD64.

Comparing an AMD64 running in native 64-bit mode to a 32-bit x86 is about as sensible (architecturally speaking) as comparing PPC to 680x0.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: potential PPC Amiga REAL CHEAP
« Reply #1 on: September 28, 2005, 12:20:00 PM »
Quote
Given how few tools are available, and the fact that OS3 doesn't have proper resource tracking or memory protection, it's fair to say OS3 is more of an application launcher rather than an OS... at least by modern standards. The apps do everything and the OS does hardly anything, much like old Macs. If that's your expectation of a modern OS, well, you can really use anything.


AmigaOS kernel is *nothing at all* like the old macos. It may not have memory protection, but that does not disqualify it from being an OS.

As for resource tracking, there are some, albeit for very low level stuff. For example memory pools mean I don't have to actually track specific memory allocation. I can release the entire pool in one go.

-edit-

Comparing it to classic 68K mac OS suggests some lack of understanding of both systems.

Since when on amigaos did you ever need to specify the amount of heap for a program? Since when did any amigaos task have to relinquish the CPU to allow another one to run? The 'cooperative multitasking' model employed in macos simply isn't multitasking at all, whereas the amiga always had a preemptive model.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: potential PPC Amiga REAL CHEAP
« Reply #2 on: October 03, 2005, 11:44:36 PM »
Quote

bloodline wrote:

Don't forget that MacOS 68k, actually used 68k exceptions to implement system calls :-o


True, I forgot about that. Well, I suppose they had to get into supervisor mode somehow :lol:
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: potential PPC Amiga REAL CHEAP
« Reply #3 on: October 10, 2005, 03:23:52 AM »
Quote

bloodline wrote:

In AmigaOS system calls are simple jumps to an address... alomst everthing is run in User Mode, AFAIK Supervisor Mode is only used for context switching, and most often that is caused by an interupt (which runs in Superviosr Mode anyway)


Interrupts (well you already said), and traps are the other things that run in supervisor mode. Task exceptions too maybe (not sure about that one, I'd need to check). As you say, just about everything else runs in user mode, which is a good thing IMO. Every time apple moved to a new 68K CPU there were all sorts of minor OS level issues, invariably fixed by getting different roms...
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: potential PPC Amiga REAL CHEAP
« Reply #4 on: October 10, 2005, 12:21:49 PM »
Quote

Piru wrote:

This OT discussion should be posted as new threads.

And no, I won't take the bait. Artificially bumping the thread to top of the forum is {bleep}ing lame.


Sorry that was me. I wasn't really paying attention and just commented about the interrupt thing :-/
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: potential PPC Amiga REAL CHEAP
« Reply #5 on: November 18, 2005, 01:14:40 AM »
Quote

lou_dias wrote:
Quote

KThunder wrote:
dude do you dig this thread up every time you find something interesting? you can start a new thread you know. they let you do that :-o


Wouldn't that be worse?


IIRC, Wayne once suggested that very long threads were not so good for the system backend, taking a long time to process etc.

-edit-

As this is post 404 in this topic it would have been amusing were it to vanish or something :-)
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: potential PPC Amiga REAL CHEAP
« Reply #6 on: November 22, 2005, 11:43:59 PM »
Anybody else loathe brussel sprouts? They taste like farts...
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Time to celebrate!
« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2006, 12:20:06 AM »
C/C++ sucks ass? Please excuse me whilst I go and laugh myself into a coma from oxygen deprivation :lol: :lol:

C/Objective-C/C++ are immensely powerful. Skill and imagination are your only realistic limits. That they integrate so well with code written in other languages only presses home the advantage these languages have already which is massive support and high performance. Lets face it, you want faster than well coded C, you end up doing asm.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Time to celebrate!
« Reply #8 on: February 01, 2006, 01:29:20 AM »
@lou_dias

Quote
Anyone here who also has an IT job knows what I mean.


You must work for somewhere worse than I do, then. By contrast most other places I've seen that use languages like C/C++ also use design tools and a range of systems and guidelines to ensure their codebase is clean, well documented and properly maintained. They simply don't have the time for people to sit there and write cryptic crap that nobody else can understand.

Quote
Code maintenance is why you don't find C++ in the business world. No one wants to maintain other people's C++ code in crucial business applications where a simple logic error results in huge corporate losses.


One of the worst places I have heard of is a multinational bank that has most of its software written and maintained in assembler (some variety for their workstations). I know some poor bugger who has to sit there all day maintaining that stuff. I was aghast when I heard that this was how they operated.

People use whatever technology they have invested time in. Your comment is therefore invalid. Sure new companies can use some new higher level programming language if they dont have any older systems to support, but contrary to your claim, C/C++ is use all over the buisness world as are languages even lower, like the example above.

Anyway, all that aside, why does the buisness use or non use of a language have any bearing on wether or not that language is suitable for your particular needs? Heck, plenty of places use cobol but I don't think I'll start using it for my own work :-)

Your post still reads "C/C++ sucks because I personally don't like it" rather than any real reason it might be inadequate. Heck, if you had just said it was not for you I doubt you'd be having to defend your position.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Time to celebrate!
« Reply #9 on: February 01, 2006, 11:24:09 AM »
@lou_dias

I think you misread my post. I am not writing C++ for my current employer, is said that if you think C++ is too a maintenance headache for buisness use then the places you have found this to be true are obviously worse then where I work ;-)

For the record, I typically use C/C++/asm in my own coding projects. At work, it's all web related stuff using PHP/MySQL/JS/Java.

Anyway, obvious flaw about it not being used, I seem to recall that buisness has a lot of heavy use of C/C++. The operating systems and appliations themselves for starters :-P

So far you have not raised a single genuine reason to substantiate your claim that the lanaguage sucks.

If you have code that crashes because you instansiate something, better look into the constructor to see if something failed rather than just blame the language. After all, the language specifies that you can't return an error from a constructor, and in any non trivial (ie resource allocating) class, something might fail. You could wrap it in an exception handler, of course, and catch the problem that way. Or better still, use a factory or builder pattern to creare objects. This can guarentee they are properly constructed before returning them.

Code doesn't have to be unsafe if you know how the language works. As someone else pointed out, char* is fine in the hands of people that know exactly how it works and don't try to misuse it. If you need more, you could use std::string...

Anyway I seem to have totally lost what this had to do with GC :-D
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Time to celebrate!
« Reply #10 on: February 02, 2006, 04:48:13 PM »
@lou_dias

To you and like minded people perhaps BASIC syntax is more readable. To myself and many others it is dramatically less readable than any C like language.

The size of syntax is absolutely naff all to do with RAM consumption, C was developed on Unix systems where even then this was far less of an issue than you seem to imply. The syntax is crisp and terse and very well structured. You might disagree, and you are welcome to, but your arguments that C is less readable is entirely subjective.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Time to celebrate!
« Reply #11 on: February 03, 2006, 08:10:21 PM »
Quote

lou_dias wrote:

When you only an 80x25 text screen, C let you cram the most code into one screen.  Ever try scrolling on some of those old dumb terminals? That's why it's ugly.


Just because you can densely pack C source code does not mean that this is how best to format it. So, you are saying C is ugly because it can be written legally with next to no formatting? What kind of argument is that?

I can write VB code just as badly and there are C source editors that will beautify your source automatically as you write it. What's your point, exactly?

Quote
It was a language reflective of the times back then.  JAVA is a cleaner rendition.


So, let's get this straight. You are saying that from a language syntax point of view, C/C++ are 'fugly' but Java is not so bad? :crazy:

Right, I mean it's not as if java's syntax is directly a subset of C/C++ or anything :-D

Take C/C++, take out pointer syntax, take out all preprocessor stuff, take out anything not defined 'inline' within a class, take out multiple inheritance, take out operator overloading, add a few keywords, an unsigned shift left operator, change subtly the meanings of one or two others and throw in more predefined classes than the average programmer can ever spend the time to fully learn and you have Java.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Time to celebrate!
« Reply #12 on: February 03, 2006, 09:28:39 PM »
Quote

lou_dias wrote:
Quote

Karlos wrote:

Take C/C++, take out pointer syntax, take out all preprocessor stuff


now you are starting to get the right idea

Like I said a cleanER rendition...


No, you said that C/C++ suited an era of cryptic, densely packed source code to save memory, screen space whatever. You then claim that java is a better rendition and yet in every important syntactical way it is identical to C/C++. Same operators, same braces, same indentation.

The things I listed were features removed from the language for different reasons, they were not removed for a cleaner syntax, even if it has led to cleaner looking source - which itself is subjective. Do you have any idea how tiring it is to read through a large java class when you are only interested in the method/property names? In this regard, it is a step backwards from C++, which at leasts allows you to define these things in a header and fill the data in later.

Again, I am afraid the point doesn't stand. If C/C++ are syntactically fugly for all the reasons you have previously stated, then java is *equally* fugly as it still retains all of the C syntax you have so far criticised.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Time to celebrate!
« Reply #13 on: February 04, 2006, 01:25:34 AM »
Look, we've established we have differences of opinion on many things, I think it's time to leave the guy alone and let him get on with the important things. Like getting VB.net running on his OS4 enabled Gamecube. Umkay?
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Time to celebrate!
« Reply #14 on: February 04, 2006, 01:30:10 AM »
Quote

Piru wrote:
My final contribution to this invaluable thread:

sums it up pretty good


Ooooooh, tactless.... *wince*
int p; // A