braner@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (braner) (12/19/86)
[Question: what's "akward" about C syntax?] In response to postings about C compilers and about ACTION: Programs in ROM are not any faster than programs in RAM. They just don't need to be loaded from disk. In the case of a program you use repeatedly in one session (e.g. editor, compiler, linker) you only need to load it ONCE, into RAMDISK. There is a very limited number of ROMs you can plug into your ST at once, but it is easy to boot various disks. Therefore it is my view that in most cases those cartridges are obsolete. Their current use is for a sceme of copy- protection (ugh: "we trust you SO LITTLE that we won't even SELL you a disk"), and also for turnkey diskless systems (e.g. an ST set up as a dumb terminal). About 10 months ago Aztec told me they did not plan (then) a port of their compiler to the ST. So they've had a late start. Too bad, since their's may be the best of the ones on the Mac. If you want a FAST C compiler, try Megamax on a RAM disk - it isn't much slower than Lightspeed C, and is available NOW on the ST. Now if they had only used the FP package that's used in Absoft FORTRAN... - Moshe Braner
rtb@ihlpf.UUCP (Todd) (12/19/86)
> > Programs in ROM are not any faster than programs in RAM. They just I Agree. > Therefore it is my view that in most cases those > cartridges are obsolete. Their current use is for a sceme of copy- > protection (ugh: "we trust you SO LITTLE that we won't even SELL you > a disk"), and also for turnkey diskless systems (e.g. an ST set up > as a dumb terminal). > I disagree. The cartridge port for the ST gives it an edge over Mac and IBM systems (Does the AMIGA have a cartridge slot??) The advantage of a cartridge is that it allows you to have up to 128k of program without taking away system ram which can then be used to make an even larger RAM disk. When ST systems larger than 1 meg become commonly available this won't be as important. Also, not being fortunate enough to own a hard disk, having a large program available instantly without waiting for it load from a floppy drive would be great. ROMS are more reliable than floyy or hard disks. Therfore there is a greater chance that a ROM program will be there when I need it. I admit I haven't lost a program due to floppy disk failure yet, but it could happen. R.T. Bradstrum
grr@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (George Robbins) (12/21/86)
In article <918@ihlpf.UUCP> rtb@ihlpf.UUCP (Todd) writes: > >The cartridge port for the ST gives it an edge over >Mac and IBM systems (Does the AMIGA have a cartridge slot??) The Amiga doesn't have a cartridge slot, rather it has a general purpose expansion port. It is trivial to make a 'ROM Cartridge' that plugs into this port, and the operating system will recognize a special signature in the ROM and give it a chance to gain control. >The advantage of a cartridge is that it allows you to have >up to 128k of program without taking away system ram which >can then be used to make an even larger RAM disk... The ability to plug in addition RAM thru the expansion port makes this less of an issue. **** please: no flames, I just tried to answer the question raised... -- George Robbins - now working for, uucp: {ihnp4|seismo|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr but no way officially representing arpa: cbmvax!grr@seismo.css.GOV Commodore, Engineering Department fone: 215-431-9255 (only by moonlite)
pes@bath63.ux63.bath.ac.uk (Paul Smee) (12/22/86)
Mostly I'd agree with Moshe, that the primary function of cartridges in this modern high-memory age is as a copy-protection device. In fact, some of the cartridges now out (e.g. Backpack) seem to me to be patently ludicrous -- virtually everything it does (with a couple exceptions, sure) requires that you put its data disk into the drive. If you're going to have to insert a disk anyway, seems to me you might as well just run the program from the disk. There is, though, one thing I'd *reealy* like to see put onto a cartridge. That's a *really good* debugging package. There would be several benefits. First, it'd always be there when you need it -- with no danger of mucking up the one critical bit of info in the corpse by having to do disk I/O. Second, it would, by definition, be out of the way totally of the address space of the program under test, meaning (a) you wouldn't have to leave room for it, and (b) the failing program couldn't garbage it. The latter, particularly, is a hazard with RAM-resident debuggers. And, with a whole 192K of potential ROM to play in, it could be be made incredibly powerful. So, howbout it, you 'registered software development houses'?