perley@flash (Donald P Perley) (03/19/90)
In article <1317@mindlink.UUCP>, a218@mindlink (Charlie Gibbs) writes: >In article <1315@mindlink.UUCP> a186@mindlink.UUCP (Harvey Taylor): >> CANONONICAL LIST OF MOST USEFUL PUBLIC DOMAIN SOFTWARE >Let us not forget VD0:, Perry Kivolowitz' wonderful asdg.vdisk.device. >RAM: is OK for transient work files but doesn't survive a re-boot. >I have never used RAD: and have no intention of ever doing so. In this case don't you mean *shareware* rather than public domain? While you may have reasons to prefer it, I wouldn't call it a "must have" now that rad: comes with the operating system. I think it was a great product for WB 1.2. -don perley perley@trub.crd.ge.com
a218@mindlink.UUCP (Charlie Gibbs) (03/20/90)
In article <11854@vdsvax.crd.ge.com> perley@flash (Donald P Perley) writes: >In article <1317@mindlink.UUCP>, a218@mindlink (Charlie Gibbs) writes: >>In article <1315@mindlink.UUCP> a186@mindlink.UUCP (Harvey Taylor): >>> CANONONICAL LIST OF MOST USEFUL PUBLIC DOMAIN SOFTWARE >>Let us not forget VD0:, Perry Kivolowitz' wonderful asdg.vdisk.device. >>RAM: is OK for transient work files but doesn't survive a re-boot. >>I have never used RAD: and have no intention of ever doing so. >In this case don't you mean *shareware* rather than public domain? Oops! Point taken. (Our local club took up a collection and sent our shareware fees to Perry in one big lump.) >While you may have reasons to prefer it, I wouldn't call it a "must have" >now that rad: comes with the operating system. I think it was a great >product for WB 1.2. I still prefer VD0: to RAD: simply because it doesn't use any memory which isn't actually occupied by files. If you set up an 880K RAD: that memory is gone for good; a VD0: of any size uses hardly anything at all until you start to actually put stuff into it, and frees up memory when you delete files in it. >-don perley >perley@trub.crd.ge.com Charlie_Gibbs@mindlink.UUCP For every vision there is an equal and opposite revision.
2011_552@uwovax.uwo.ca (03/21/90)
In article <1340@mindlink.UUCP>, a218@mindlink.UUCP (Charlie Gibbs) writes: > [...] > I still prefer VD0: to RAD: simply because it doesn't use any memory > which isn't actually occupied by files. If you set up an 880K RAD: > that memory is gone for good; a VD0: of any size uses hardly anything > at all until you start to actually put stuff into it, and frees up > memory when you delete files in it. > I prefer vd0: and vdk: for the same reason. I used to use Absoft fortran a lot; it places variables on the stack, and my programs required a _lot_ of stack space (1 meg or more). Rad: ties up the space permanently. I occasionally needed to dedicate almost everything to the stack. A recoverable ramdisk which expands only as needed was a must. > Charlie_Gibbs@mindlink.UUCP > For every vision there is an equal and opposite revision. -- Terry Gaetz -- gaetz@uwovax.uwo.ca -- gaetz@uwovax.bitnet
perry@madnix.UUCP (Perry Kivolowitz) (03/27/90)
In article <1340@mindlink.UUCP> a218@mindlink.UUCP (Charlie Gibbs) writes: >>>Let us not forget VD0:, Perry Kivolowitz' wonderful asdg.vdisk.device. >>>RAM: is OK for transient work files but doesn't survive a re-boot. >>>I have never used RAD: and have no intention of ever doing so. > >>In this case don't you mean *shareware* rather than public domain? I hereby officially declare my intention *not* to receive any more shareware donations and fully enter our Recoverable Ram Disk (of which I am the author) into the public domain. It can now be used for any purpose by anyone as long as proper credit is given. So long and thanks for all the fish. :-) pk -- Perry Kivolowitz, ASDG Inc. ``We look for things. Things that make us go.'' UUCP: {harvard|rutgers|ucbvax}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!perry CIS: 76004,1765 PLINK: pk-asdg