Re: SD: Supernova (was:Re: Shells and games)


[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: SD: Supernova (was:Re: Shells and games)



At 05:34 PM 9/12/97 -0500, you wrote:
>> This sounds like SuperNova...AND USGard. Both SuperNova and USGard are
>> similar enough to have these features (except we're working on a
>> "better" library system...)
>
>Umm, Usgard no longer has a library system... except 'fake libs' which I
>don't understand at all. (Winlib?!! The most useless lib of them all!
>And anyway if it was so good why not include the routines in the shell
>itself??!!)

"FakeLibraries" mean the programmer has to go to a little more work before
using them, there are no more LIB_CALLs.  WinLib was brought back for a
couple of reasons; some people liked it (there are some nice features, like
control characters in strings), people liked the luxury shell, and well...
I don't have a third.  But Fake Libraries also mean debuggers will be
possible again!  I am at work (or close to getting to be at work) on
converting Ramdom to Usgard 1.1.

>> 2. Difficult to decide upon a single standard. Both the SuperNova team
>> and USGard team realize that the "competitor's" library format was
>> better in some ways, but it didn't matter to each team. Our libraries
>> take up more space, but make it easier for programmers to use.
>> USGard's libraries are more efficient and take up less space, but make
>> it more difficult for programmers to use. The point is, the USGard
>> Team placed its emphasis on size while the SuperNova Team placed
>> emphasis on allowing more "freedom" for programmers.
>
>This would be nice.

I should mention I don't understand how you make libraries easier for
programmers...  Typing LIB_CALL_ wasn't giving me tendanitus or anything.

---
Evil Jim
Viva La Mexico
<eviljim@writeme.com>
http://members.tripod.com/~eviljim/
I want to die in my sleep like my Grandfather, not screaming in pain like
the passengers in my car...


Follow-Ups: References: