home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: mail2news.demon.co.uk!hpl3sn03.cern.ch
- From: Dan Pop <danpop@mail.cern.ch>
- Newsgroups: comp.edu,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: C or C++ for a 14-year old?
- Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 21:53:44 +0100
- Organization: CERN European Lab for Particle Physics
- Message-ID: <9601152053.AA06670@dxmint.cern.ch>
- References: <4b30ld$lp2$1@mhafc.production.compuserve.com> <4d4jeh$fv1@wombat.melbpc.org.au> <w+PJjMD4ED1aLz3@dexam.another.gun.de> <4ddsg4$p4e@sundog.tiac.net>
- X-NNTP-Posting-Host: hpl3sn03.cern.ch
- X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #7 (NOV)
- X-Mail2News-Path: dxmint.cern.ch!hpl3sn03.cern.ch
-
- amoreira@nine.com (Alberto C Moreira) writes:
-
- >Still, there's no worse restriction on a programmer than not to be
- >able to talk directly to the hardware.
- >
- >The best operating system isn't the one that does more, but the one
- >that gets out of the way when it's not needed. With DOS, I can
- >reach my hardware any time I want. With Windows, I can do that by
- >writing a VDD. With Windows 95, I can load that VDD on the fly.
- >
- >With Unix, I probably need to recompile the kernel - that is, if I'm a
- >hacker and I have the Unix source code.
-
- The point is that with a good OS you don't have to talk directly to the
- hardware: this is the job of the OS, not of the application.
-
- Direct access to the hardware within an application is needed only when
- the underlying OS doesn't provide the functionality needed or when it
- provides it in a horribly inefficient way.
-
- Programs which access the hardware directly:
-
- 1. Are inherently non-portable.
-
- 2. Cannot be safely used in a multitasking environment.
-
- Of course, these points are non-issues for the MSDOS programmer.
-
- Dan
- --
- Dan Pop
- CERN, CN Division
- Email: danpop@mail.cern.ch
- Mail: CERN - PPE, Bat. 31 R-004, CH-1211 Geneve 23, Switzerland
-