home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: gate.net!pslfl2-8
- From: bhutto@gate.net (William Hutto)
- Newsgroups: comp.edu,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: C or C++ for a 14-year old?
- Date: 16 Jan 1996 22:17:20 GMT
- Organization: CyberGate, Inc.
- Message-ID: <4dh85g$1b8u@news.gate.net>
- References: <4b30ld$lp2$1@mhafc.production.compuserve.com> <4d4jeh$fv1@wombat.melbpc.org.au> <w+PJjMD4ED1aLz3@dexam.another.gun.de> <4ddsg4$p4e@sundog.tiac.net> <9601152053.AA06670@dxmint.cern.ch>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: pslfl2-8.gate.net
- X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
-
- In article <9601152053.AA06670@dxmint.cern.ch>,
- Dan Pop <danpop@mail.cern.ch> wrote:
- >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.
-
- 3. Keep programming a viable vocation.
-
- 4. Make lots of people happy, and rake in mega$$$. ;)
-
- Bill
-
- "Whatcha got on?...Your mind?"
-