Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!rutgers!cbmvax!bj
From: bj@cbmvax.commodore.com (Brian Jackson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re: 2.0+ RKM's
Message-ID: <18182@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 28 Jan 91 16:09:24 GMT
References: <1991Jan23.034026.27876@cs.ucla.edu> <17987@cbmvax.commodore.com> <17994@cbmvax.commodore.com> <10511@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <18161@cbmvax.commodore.com> <10522@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: bj@cbmvax.commodore.com (Brian Jackson)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 41

In article <10522@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes:
>Would it scare you to know that I learned asynch I/O without RKM's?  :)
>I became a developer more by "accident" than anything else.  Ah, those were
>the days... :)

"Scare" isn't really the right word. "Impress", maybe :) 
>
>Perhaps I've mistated or mislead my audience.  The RKMs *ARE* essential (well,
>it's a whole lot easier with 'em) and most of what you'll learn will translate
>across to 2.0 very well indeed.
>
>There are some significant "Zen" differences between 2.0 and 1.3 that you
>should be aware of, however.  I/O and intuition differences come to mind most
>immediately, though there are others.

The old ways still work fine, actually. The new (2.0) ways are better and
easier, of course.  I think the point that Randell and I are trying to
make is that regardless of the fact that there is a new OS coming, the
vast majority of valid Amiga programmer "know-how" is still to be found in
the existing RKMs.  I was just afraid that your message could give the
impression that the RKMs had been made obsolete in some way by the
impending release of 2.0 and that's not the case at all.

>Right, except that 2.0 embodies more than just functionality increase,
>there are whole new classes of approaches to some problems -- 1.3 *is*
>a good stepping stone, but anyone looking for that object-oriented system
>that BYTE describes is going to faint the first time they use intuition :)

The BYTE article is about the Operating System (Exec) and it specifically
rules out Intuition as part of it's scope. I suspect that Peter is headed
in that general direction with Intuition (you'd have to ask him).

>David Navas

bj

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
 | Brian Jackson  Software Engineer, Commodore-Amiga Inc.  GEnie: B.J. |
 | bj@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com    or  ...{uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!bj     |
 | "Seek simplicity, and distrust it."                                 |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------