instead of C++ shouldn't ms have used masm for win95 
Author Message
 instead of C++ shouldn't ms have used masm for win95

code reuse:     not easy
portability:    NO
speed:          /  /  / / ///FAST/
size:           small
-----------------------------
Osama ALASSIRY

http://www.*-*-*.com/ ~oa



Thu, 11 Mar 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 instead of C++ shouldn't ms have used masm for win95

Quote:

> code reuse:     not easy
> portability:    NO
> speed:          /  /  / / ///FAST/
> size:           small
> -----------------------------
> Osama ALASSIRY

> http://members.tripod.com/~oa

  Development/debug cycles: FOREVER


Fri, 12 Mar 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 instead of C++ shouldn't ms have used masm for win95

Quote:

>code reuse: not easy
>portability:        NO
>speed:              /  /  / / ///FAST/
>size:               small
>-----------------------------
>Osama ALASSIRY

>http://members.tripod.com/~oa

I would guess that some portions ARE in asembly language, altho I do
not know this for a fact.

Development and debugging can really slow down LARGE A/L projects as
mentioned.

Ep

Ed Parry - Southern California, USA



Fri, 12 Mar 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 instead of C++ shouldn't ms have used masm for win95

I missed the first part of this thread, but judging from the title, someone
needs to study the development of Windows some more.  There is no, none,
zilch, NADA C++ in the Win95 code.  It is all written in C and (you guessed
it), assembler.  Windows NT is written almost entirely in C++, tho.  Check out
Adrian King's _Inside Windows 95_ published by MS Press.  It has lots o info
on the development process of Win95 and is a pretty good read.

Just my $.02

Quote:


>>code reuse:    not easy
>>portability:   NO
>>speed:         /  /  / / ///FAST/
>>size:          small
>>-----------------------------
>>Osama ALASSIRY

>>http://members.tripod.com/~oa

>I would guess that some portions ARE in asembly language, altho I do
>not know this for a fact.

>Development and debugging can really slow down LARGE A/L projects as
>mentioned.

>Ep

>Ed Parry - Southern California, USA




Sun, 14 Mar 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 instead of C++ shouldn't ms have used masm for win95


Quote:


>> code reuse:     not easy
>> portability:    NO
>> speed:          /  /  / / ///FAST/
>> size:           small
>> -----------------------------
>> Osama ALASSIRY

>> http://members.tripod.com/~oa

>  Development/debug cycles: FOREVER

   Perhaps we'll all get lucky and Microsoft will use TERSE for the
*next* version of Windows.  Then we all will "Lose Wait".

With TERSE...

Code Reuse:   Trivial
Portability:  How's 85% of ALL the computers on the planet?
Speed:        /    /   /  / //FAST/...  Nothing is faster...
Size:         Small...   Nothing is smaller
Development:  A breeze as compared to traditional assembly
Debug Cycles: Only slightly more than traditional HLLs

   So, come on Microsoft.  Come have a look at TERSE!  It will make
*both* the public *and* your programmers VERY happy.  Visit my site:

                        http://www.terse.com

         Jim Neil           ___  ___/  ____/   ___  /   ____/   ____/
      Creator of The            /     /       /    /   /       /
TERSE Programming Language     /     ___/      ___/ ____  /   ___/
   ISBN:  0-9652660-0-1       /     /       /  \         /   /

   http://www.terse.com



Sun, 14 Mar 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 instead of C++ shouldn't ms have used masm for win95


Quote:
> I missed the first part of this thread, but judging from the title,
> someone needs to study the development of Windows some more.  There
> is no, none, zilch, NADA C++ in the Win95 code.  It is all written
> in C and (you guessed it), assembler.  Windows NT is written almost
> entirely in C++, tho.  

Topicality is marginal at best so I'll keep it short, but this isn't
correct - _most_ of NT is written in C; C++ is used almost exclusively
in the graphics subsystem.

Quote:
> Check out Adrian King's _Inside Windows 95_ published by MS Press.
> It has lots o info on the development process of Win95 and is a
> pretty good read.

Though not deep or detailed, Helen Custer's _Inside Windows NT_ is a
worthwhile book as well.

--
    Later,
    Jerry.



Tue, 16 Mar 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 6 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Why exceptions shouldn't be used for flow control [Re: YAS to the

2. calling MS Visual C++ function from MASM

3. Using SQL Update Instead of Clarion's Update

4. Python 1.4's print uses stderr instead stdout on Linux

5. Using MASM or WASM with Borland C++

6. Using Borland C++ 5.0 and MASM 6.11

7. Uploading to Simtel.Net's MS-DOS, Win3.x and Win95 collections

8. Uploading to Simtel.Net's MS-DOS, Win3.x and Win95 collections

9. Uploading to Simtel.Net's MS-DOS, Win3.x and Win95 collections

10. Uploading to Simtel.Net's MS-DOS, Win3.x and Win95 collections

11. Uploading to Simtel.Net's MS-DOS, Win3.x and Win95 collections

12. Linking masm obj's to Borland c++

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software