lwv@n8emr.UUCP (Larry W. Virden) (03/19/89)
Okay, lets drop the Mac bashing (I LIKE the mac as a machine myself - my concerns are with what is going to happen with the support of the machine that I have at home). instead, lets discuss what it is that we need on our Apples today that we dont have. If we dont know what new programs we need, how are we to expect that we will ever get them. After we have this list, then we can see amount the 4-5 million Apple users who would like to fulfill that need. Even if the commercial folks kill support for this machine, that doesnt mean that we have to sit here and take it - or even worse, buy a different machine. Let's support it ourselves. I mean - how did Woz begin all of this anyways - wait for someone to build the first machine and write the first assembler so that he could begin? I will begin. What _I_ want on my IIgs is a FAST C compiler. I need not have toolbox support. I do want an ANSI C compiler (current projections are that the final approval of the ANSI stds will occur in the next 5 weeks). I do want code that runs fast. And I would appreciate code which, though it might run much slower, was the result of a VERY FAST compile. What I mean here is that during development I dont care how fast the code is as much as I care how fast I can get TO the executable code. The other thing that I personally want on my IIgs is Minix, or something like it. Minix is a Unix-alike which permits multitasking and I believe even multiuser capabilities. I want to be able to run a 'subset' of Unix here at the house, without going out and selling my GS and buying a MS-DOS machine or an Atari. Now I am certainly willing to work on Minix - but I am not even going to start until I get a good C compiler. The other thing that I need to buy is a hard disk of some sort - and I am working on that right now (got to get those taxes done first). -- Larry W. Virden 674 Falls Place, Reynoldsburg, OH 43068 (614) 864-8817 75046,606 (CIS) ; LVirden (ALPE) ; osu-cis!n8emr!lwv (UUCP) osu-cis!n8emr!lwv@TUT.CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU (INTERNET) The world's not inherited from our parents, but borrowed from our children.
jm7e+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU ("Jeremy G. Mereness") (03/20/89)
A good suggestion, Larry. A little easierr said then done, but what isn't? If the Apple // is to prove that is has the strongest user base of any PC, then people have to act. Anyway, I would like to see... o a fast, native code assembler in native code that works better than APW o ditto for debugger o a fast, native code C compiler o a multi-tasking operating system or atleast an approach that would allow multiple applications to be open at once like SoftSwitch o a better DOS, that did not use 10K of disk space where the Mac would use 3K o stand alone applications combining the capabilities of Excel, Lotus, and Cricket Graph. I mean, why not? Productivility, and _somebody_ will find so many features useful. o chooser CDA o support for a math coprocessor o a fast, capable MacWrite clone that fits, w/ system and dictionary, on one 3.5 disk o Appleshare support o a widely distributed, improved Basic.System with more capable commands o a CDA editor like MiniWriter o GS version of ResEdit and use of resource forks. This can go on, but these would solve the problems that prevent the //gs from being recognized by this university's authorities as a possible substitute for the Macintosh. In fact, if it just booted up faster, and had the _fast_ MacWrite and Excel clones and Appleshare support, everything would be fine because that is all the Mac is really expected to do in most situations. More languages, perfromance resembling ThinkC and LightSpeed Pascal, would help too. jeremy mereness jm7e+@andrew.cmu.edu
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn ) (03/20/89)
In article <931@n8emr.UUCP> lwv@n8emr.UUCP (Larry W. Virden) writes: >I will begin. What _I_ want on my IIgs is a FAST C compiler. I need not >have toolbox support. I do want an ANSI C compiler (current projections >are that the final approval of the ANSI stds will occur in the next 5 weeks). >I do want code that runs fast. And I would appreciate code which, though >it might run much slower, was the result of a VERY FAST compile. What >I mean here is that during development I dont care how fast the code is as >much as I care how fast I can get TO the executable code. As a member of the ANSI C standardization committee (X3J11), it may be of interest for me to note that the ANSI-specific C features are not my first priority for IIGS C compilers. Compilation speed even with APW C can be enhanced considerably by (a) keeping source modules small and using a "make"-like procedure to reduce recompilation, and (b) adding an accelerator such as TransWarp GS. I take for granted that APW users use a hard disk; floppies are too painful for this. My most-wanted feature for IIGS C is support for ByteWorks' ORCA desktop debugger. It is pretty obvious how to implement this, and I'm hoping someone is working on it. Toolbox support is pretty much an "add-on"; whether or not it exists is independent of the real design choices for a IIGS C implementation. >The other thing that I personally want on my IIgs is Minix, or something >like it. Minix is a Unix-alike which permits multitasking and I believe >even multiuser capabilities. I want to be able to run a 'subset' >of Unix here at the house, without going out and selling my GS and buying >a MS-DOS machine or an Atari. Any substantially UNIX-like system for the IIGS would be very useful. You're not likely to get this out of Apple, though, because they think of the Apple II line as for kiddies and "obviously" you don't want to turn kiddies loose in a UNIX shell. >Now I am certainly willing to work on Minix - but I am not even going to >start until I get a good C compiler. I don't see why APW C isn't suitable. I use it for lots of C projects. It could stand some improvement and expanded libraries, but we can come up with the latter ourselves.
lwv@n8emr.UUCP (Larry W. Virden) (03/23/89)
In article <9883@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) writes:
-->Any substantially UNIX-like system for the IIGS would be very useful.
-->You're not likely to get this out of Apple, though, because they think
-->of the Apple II line as for kiddies and "obviously" you don't want to
-->turn kiddies loose in a UNIX shell.
-->
Perhaps I wasnt very clear in my original msg - I wasnt looking for my
list of things FROM Apple, I was looking for folks out there in USENET-land
to contribute to the list of tools that they themselves saw as necessary
to feel like they were getting the full use of their machine. And I was
looking for the list with an eye to encouraging all those C programmers
and assembly writers and even some of those Pascal people to write their
little fingers off writing some of these tools. Why? I often see folks
looking for projects to take on. Porting some of the utilities available
in MSDOS and UNIX arenas should be able to be ported easily enough.
As for why I said I was going to wait for a good C compiler - well, maybe
APW C isnt all that bad - I just remember reading folks saying that they
were not about to use the stdio package since it made their programs a minimum
or 15k for hello world. I thought at the time that it was a bad linker, but
then someone else told me that the code in generate was rather large
--
Larry W. Virden 674 Falls Place, Reynoldsburg, OH 43068 (614) 864-8817
75046,606 (CIS) ; LVirden (ALPE) ; osu-cis!n8emr!lwv (UUCP)
osu-cis!n8emr!lwv@TUT.CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU (INTERNET)
The world's not inherited from our parents, but borrowed from our children.mikes@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu (Michael Steele) (03/23/89)
In article <931@n8emr.UUCP> lwv@n8emr.UUCP (Larry W. Virden) writes: > >I will begin. What _I_ want on my IIgs is a FAST C compiler. I need not >have toolbox support. I do want an ANSI C compiler (current projections >are that the final approval of the ANSI stds will occur in the next 5 weeks). Will someone PLEASE port gcc to the GS. I would do it but my knowledge of 65816 assembly isn't too hot. GCC is a PD compiler available for UNIX machines, Amigas, and Atari ST's ( the group of PC's that the Gs should be in). Once this FREE compiler was available there is EMACS as an excellent editor and all we need is a UNIX port. GNU has started working on generalized UNIX but we ought to get started on the kernel. Minix would be and excellent place to start. Given a free compiler and multi-tasking OS would fill in Major gaps that Apple is never going to fill for us. I personally like the line oriented environment for poking around the machine since it is considerably faster than Windowing! >The other thing that I personally want on my IIgs is Minix, or something >like it. Minix is a Unix-alike which permits multitasking and I believe >even multiuser capabilities. AMEN!!! -- Michael Steele mikes@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu mikes@ncsuctix.ncsuvx.ncsu.edu netoprms@ncsuvm.bitnet
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn ) (03/23/89)
In article <940@n8emr.UUCP> lwv@n8emr.UUCP (Larry W. Virden) writes: > - I just remember reading folks saying that they were not about >to use the stdio package since it made their programs a minimum >or 15k for hello world. Yeah, one used to hear this bogus argument about UNIX stdio too. There are indeed SOME applications where the overhead of stdio is not a good tradeoff against its benefits. A program that merely prints "hello, world" is one of them. But in a large application, especially one that needs to run reasonably efficiently in a wide variety of environments, stdio is indispensible.
wombat@claris.com (Scott Lindsey) (03/24/89)
From article <2692@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu>, by mikes@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu (Michael Steele): > > Will someone PLEASE port gcc to the GS. I would do it but my > knowledge of 65816 assembly isn't too hot. GCC is a PD compiler > available for UNIX machines, Amigas, and Atari ST's ( the group > of PC's that the Gs should be in). If someone can get me gcc source I'll be glad to start working on a port part-time... I can't ftp from this machine. I really don't know how big a project it'll be. The compiler will have to compile down to object code... not to assembly: doing it like pcc & just using the system assembler would be slow as all get-out. But this means that the compiler has to know about OMF... -- Scott Lindsey |"Cold and misty morning. I heard a warning borne in the air Claris Corp. | About an age of power when no one had an hour to spare" ames!claris!wombat| DISCLAIMER: These are not the opinions of Claris, Apple, wombat@claris.com | StyleWare, the author, or anyone else living or dead.
lwv@n8emr.UUCP (Larry W. Virden) (03/24/89)
Why would having it generate assembly code and then using something for instance like Merlin 16+ be so slow? I have been talking to Roger Wagner and Glen Bredon and Merlin apparently SCREAMS (I am getting ready to send in my upgrade materials). -- Larry W. Virden 674 Falls Place, Reynoldsburg, OH 43068 (614) 864-8817 75046,606 (CIS) ; LVirden (ALPE) ; osu-cis!n8emr!lwv (UUCP) osu-cis!n8emr!lwv@TUT.CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU (INTERNET) The world's not inherited from our parents, but borrowed from our children.