NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/comp/sys/amiga/applicat/8679

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-17 | 6.0 KB

Xref: sparky comp.sys.amiga.applications:8679 comp.sys.amiga.introduction:1536 comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:29162
Path: sparky!uunet!ukma!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!apple!decwrl!contessa!mwm
From: [e-mail] (Mike Meyer)
Subject: Re: Programming
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications,comp.sys.amiga.introduction,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Distribution: world
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
X-NewsSoftware: Amiga Yarn 3.4, 1992/08/12 15:49:52
Keywords:
Summary:
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Nov 92 11:37:50 PST
Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica
Lines: 123

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Robert Fentiman) wrote:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mike Meyer) writes:
>
> >Selective eyesight, huh. Cool. Or maybe you didn't see "from the
> >evidence I have". Of course, that AMOS can open new screens doesn't
> >take it out of that class - all package in that class open their own
> >screens, or even new ones, and the user can control the modes. But you
> >still always have to operate on THOSE screens, not WB screens.
                           ^
>
> Neither you or I have proven our points.  I *may* have seen something
> somewhere that can open a window on WB.  But, as I said before, that is
> NO reason to discount the language.

You're right - it's just a reason for not using it for anything but games.

> BTW, nothing wrong wiht my
> eyesight, just yours again. you said Amos has to work in that SCREEN.
> Thsi is singualr, and from it can be derrived that you don't understand
> that AMOS can use MULTIPLE SCREENS.

Your weak eyes missed the S I put in, didn't they? I marked it for you
this time.

> >Exactly. If you check out my other posts, you'll see that the problem
> >is that it appears that the AMOS package is programmed do things
> >incorrectly.  If this is true, then it is impossible to produce
> >system-compliant programs with AMOS.
>
> And if you check my other posts, you notice I'm saying that it is not a
> problem, but it allows me to to have, say, more sprites on the screen
> than you can (and other little tricks).  Anyway, as I keep saying, this
> is NO reason to discount the language (even if if *may* be true).

No, it *IS* a problem if you can't turn it off. It's sufficient to
discount the package.

> Your eyesight again.  You were responding to my comment on C, not AMOS.
> Forgetful too, huh.  Well for the 5th time (3rd in this post alone),
> AMOS is NOT buggy.  Refer to my previous references to this.  Your
> suggestion is unwarrented.

Prove that AMOS is not buggy. Write something that is AUISG compliant
in it.

> >No, I also watch them come up and prove that they, LIKE EVERY OTHER
> >AMOS PROGAM I'VE EVER SEEN, aren't compliant with the rules for
> >AmigaDOS programs. If I'd EVER seen an AMOS program behave in a
> >system-compliant manner, I'd just assume that most AMOS programmers
> >are incapable of producing a system-compliant program, rather than that
> >the AMOS package is incapable of producing a system-compliant program.
>
> I'm still waiting for that list you know...   I bring up a point about
> many Euro-Demos, a LOT of people like them, they are imporessive, and
> many are NOT AmigaDOS programs (and there are many examples in this in
> other languages such as assembler, C , others).

I gave the list already - they kill the input stream, which kills
commodities, and they take window/screen control from intuition. This
might be acceptable in a game. It's a bug in anything else.

> >> I have not seen ANY of your messages on the net.
> >
> >Just more selective eyesight, huh?
>
> No, just the absence of you messages (or are you posting on
> comp.sys.IBM.advocay?

Nope - I'm replying to people who recommend AMOS for things. Maybe
you're READING comp.sys.IBM.advocacy?

> Maybe if you actually post, you might get a response (if you haven't
> noticed, one or two others HAVE posted on this subject SINCE WE HAVE STARTED).

I did - the *best* response is "well, I think you can do that". I
suspect that I don't get a "You can do that" is because, in AMOS, you
CAN'T do that.

> NOTE: To my knowlege, Mandarin software has NEVER released a version of
> AMOS just for a new OS.

You're right - I don't know of them releasing a version for a new OS;
just a new machine. Oddly enough, languages that actually let the
programmer control what's going on don't have that problem.

> It has NOTHING to do with a new OS.

In that case, why did you mention it when I talked about trying AMOS
on a new hardware/OS combination? After all, it has NOTHING to do with
that.

> Since you OBVIOUSLY don't program in AMOS, you have NO merrit on this.
> I count no less than 7 specificly copper control commands in AMOS.

Huh? I don't need to program in AMOS to know that every AMOS program
I've run screws with the copper list before it opens it's screen. I
can watch it happen. Now, it may be that all those games were written
by incompetents, but it's more likely that AMOS just behaves that way.

> Besides, a LOT of programs don't work when you upgrade to a new OS
> (including some languages).

A lot? I sure didn't notice that. Then again, I trash things that are
clearly poorly written fairly quickly. I suspect that most of those
LOT you saw are poorly written things, including the languages.

> A matchbox tank, sure.  Read my posts and also notice that an AMOS
> programmer does NOT write the interpreter or the compiler and such.

You're right, and I suspect that those are where the bugs are. And a
matchbox tank is an equally good analogy.

> They actually program in the LANGUAGE.  The language is easy, and
> beginers don't make such utilities that need to be system compliant.

Ah, so you admit that AMOS doesn't produce system compliant programs.
Which is the point. And *NOBODY* should get into the habit of
producing things that aren't system compliant if it can be avoided.
Guess what you avoid in this case.

    <mike