[ros-general] New to ReactOS

Kevin Lawton kepla at btinternet.com
Thu Oct 20 08:11:35 UTC 2005 

Me too, Justin. 
After more than a couple of decades in 'software development' I find I can become somewhat jaded by 'the same old thing', but there's still a few challenges to be met if we look for them.  ;-)  
I guess I've always been 'turned on' by good engineering - novel and effective solutions to creating anything, whether it be electrical mechanical or software. Like a suspension bridge, or a large building which doesn't fall over in an earthquake, or a space rocket which can actually carry more than enough fuel to reach orbit, or a steam locomotive which can manage 25% efficiency, or well-written software. I think there is an enormous gulf between 'hacking code' and 'software engineering'. 
I also think that any opportunity to show Microsoft 'how it should be done' is to be welcomed. 
Maybe I need to subscribe to ros-theorising or ros-soapbox !     lol   
Keep right on meeting those challenges - there's life in us old dogs yet ! 
Kevin.   
    
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jwalsh at bigpond.net.au [mailto:jwalsh at bigpond.net.au]
> Sent: 20 October 2005 05:07
> To: ReactOS General List
> Cc: Kevin Lawton
> Subject: RE: [ros-general] New to ReactOS
> 
> 
>  
> Right on Kevin, right on !!
> I intuitively know you aren't trying to win. I like your style.
> People of my generation don't like to be patronised, just challenged.
> I have to admit I am not a spring chicken, just old and wasting away.
> People like you give me that added burst of life. 
> Please let me thank you. Lets make ReactOS something to boast about.
> It makes me feel so good to have found ros-general.
> Here the old and the young can come together with one mind.
> 
> But a few (little) adjustments could be helpful.
> One such adjustment would be a doorway to MinGW-Msys and to Earnie Boyd.
> He is the guy to help all those "C" advocates.
> The doorway should be named ros-programming.
> The other should be named ros-users.
> Perhaps another for ros-abusers (just kidding).
> 
> Cheers and rosuccess
> 
> Justin
> ---- Kevin Lawton <kepla at btinternet.com> wrote: 
> > Hey, Justin, I wasn't trying to 'win' - didn't want to sound 
> better or anything. 
> > I just wanted to inject a point or two into the discussion. 
> > Anyway, thanks - the link is interesting. 
> > I still think the same principle applies - use a high-level 
> language where you want the emphasis on ease of development and 
> maintenance but use a low-level language where speed and 
> efficiency are paramount. What I do think is interesting is where 
> a low-level language, like assembler, is used to produce small 
> fast software - far more than strictly 'necessary' - resulting in 
> high efficiency and an unexpected turn of speed. Like, for 
> example, the concept of a GUI-based op system which will fit on a 
> floppy disk. In other forms of engineering, electrical or 
> mechanical for example, efficiency is highly desirable for 
> economy in both energy consumption and materials usage. Software 
> engineering doesn't currently seem to be following similar principles. 
> > What I think would be really cool would be if ReactOS was not 
> just a Windows replacement, but a faster and more efficient 
> Windows replacement. 
> > Kevin.   
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: jwalsh at bigpond.net.au [mailto:jwalsh at bigpond.net.au]
> > > Sent: 18 October 2005 14:36
> > > To: ReactOS General List
> > > Cc: Kevin Lawton
> > > Subject: RE: [ros-general] New to ReactOS
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Ok Kevin, you win.
> > > How can I begin to answer you?
> > > Except to say, take a look at where tha AIM group: Apple IBM and 
> > > Motorola are going.
> > > It looks like Wintel group Microsoft and Intel will not be far 
> > > behind either.
> > > 
> > > So please take a look at what has been thrown away in 1996.
> > > 
> > > www.cs.uta.fi/kurssit/OPOK/smalltalk/Smalltalk%20Express/
> > > 
> > > Please download it. It's only about 3 MB compressed (in two files).
> > > It is free non commercial and will do absolutley no damage I 
> promise you.
> > > Because it was designed for DOS it will call the Windows API only 
> > > very rarely.
> > > In fact I ran  it in safe mode and I could access the hard disk, 
> > > which is supposed to be impossible to do.
> > > This version is probably limited to 256 colors so make sure you 
> > > switch the display.
> > > Then we can talk later about the relavance of 'C' and 'Assembler'
> > > Regards and rosuccess
> > > Justin
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ---- Kevin Lawton <kepla at btinternet.com> wrote: 
> > > > Yeah, okay, but . . .
> > > > With C being a 'higher level' language than assembler it 
> will always be
> > > > easier for a group of humans to work on a project in. You could 
> > > take this
> > > > further and use something like Java, though not for an 
> > > op-system kernel as
> > > > Java programs need something below them to run the run-time 
> > > virtual machine.
> > > > C is a good language for writing an op system in because that 
> > > is why it was
> > > > designed (by Kerningham and Ritchie - their book on C is still 
> > > the best work
> > > > of its kind). It was created to write the Unix op system in and the
> > > > combination of high and low-level features will always make 
> it ideal for
> > > > such a task. In terms of generating nice tight machine code 
> > > when compiled, C
> > > > is probably the best high-level language in this respect.
> > > > Modern computers are so enormously powerful that most projects 
> > > feel that it
> > > > is unnecessary to use assembler for the extreme efficiency it 
> > > offers - C is
> > > > more than 'good enough'. But, when projects ARE written for 
> > > modern machines
> > > > using assembler we then start to see just how fast things can 
> > > go. We might
> > > > feel that the 'average' PC is plenty fast enough performing 
> > > day-to-day tasks
> > > > with an op system written in C and applications in Java or 
> VB, and it
> > > > probably is, but give it a chance to run software written in 
> > > good assembler
> > > > and you can get quite a surprise. Even if we think we can spare 
> > > it, those
> > > > high-level language programs (incl op system) can perform 
> > > nothing like the
> > > > blistering performance you can get from really good assembler 
> > > code. You also
> > > > find that because assembler programming is so 'direct' then the 
> > > resulting
> > > > machine code tends to be far more compact than that 
> generated from other
> > > > languages. Smaller programs (op systems included) use less 
> room on disk,
> > > > load faster into a smaller memory space and tend to have 
> > > shorter execution
> > > > paths.
> > > > It is all fine and dandy that ReactOS will be a working 'clone' 
> > > of Windows
> > > > but Windows is often criticised for being large and slow. What 
> > > if ReactOS
> > > > could achieve full Windows compatibility while being much 
> > > smaller and faster
> > > > ?
> > > > Kevin.
> > > > 
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: ros-general-bounces at reactos.org
> > > > > [mailto:ros-general-bounces at reactos.org]On Behalf Of Murphy, Ged
> > > > > (Bolton)
> > > > > Sent: 18 October 2005 08:13
> > > > > To: 'ReactOS General List'
> > > > > Subject: RE: [ros-general] New to ReactOS
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > jwalsh at bigpond.net.au wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Who uses assembler for serious anything these days?
> > > > > <snip>
> > > > > > If anybody from ros is really in need of assembler then
> > > > > something is sus.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Considering you can't build ROS without an assembler, something
> > > > > must be sus.
> > > > > If you look at the ReactOS kernel, you will find many asm files.
> > > > > My point was that the vast majority is written in C and 
> is generally
> > > > > preferred.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ged.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > 
> ************************************************************************
> > > > > The information contained in this message or any of its
> > > > > attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
> > > > > use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
> > > > > privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
> > > > > but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
> > > > > addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
> > > > > dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
> > > > > If you have received this message in error, please contact
> > > > > postmaster at exideuk.co.uk
> > > > > <mailto:postmaster at exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
> > > > >
> > > > > Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
> > > > > producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
> > > > > Further information can be found at www.exide.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > ros-general mailing list
> > > > > ros-general at reactos.org
> > > > > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > ros-general mailing list
> > > > ros-general at reactos.org
> > > > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > ros-general mailing list
> > ros-general at reactos.org
> > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
>

More information about the Ros-general mailing list