Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!psuvax1!rutgers!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmdeo!jsmami!jsmoller From: jsmoller@jsmami.UUCP (Jesper Steen Moller) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: Short Hello World Message-ID: Date: 16 May 91 23:50:49 GMT Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Organization: Danish SofTech Lines: 52 In article mwm@pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer) writes: > > In article <1991May15.103610.12158@starnet.uucp> sschaem@starnet.uucp (Stephan Schaem) writes: > > Yea, like CBM will KILL all early software written for the amiga do > win 8 bytes! (Hope people jok when they talk about CBM > replacing/removing a library function ) > > Nope, we're not joking. With 2.0, there are lots of replacements for > "old" library entries, and CBM is universally telling people not to > use the old version of the call. I don't think CBM would remove OldOpenLibrary, as programs written for pre-1.2 should continue to work without recompilation if properly designed. Also, as OldOpenLibrary is in the very middle of the exec.library vector table (6 bytes) and probable does: moveq.l #$00,D0 JMP _LVOOpenLibrary(A6) it would be plain silly to remove it - they could win only 6 bytes... > Now, go down the road to the next major OS release (3.0?). Judging > from past experience, that's 5+ years away. That means that the only > correctly written software that would be broken by deleting the old > entries (or better - at least at that point - replacing them with an > error return) is five or more years old. I think deleting or changing functions radically like above is rude and in conflict with the original design. I can tolerate something like GetScreenData() being "crippled" for 2.0 (I can see why, too...) but making correctly written software malfuntion (except because of new hardware, mabye) is more than I can take. I'd rather go back to the C= 64 then - things didn't change back then... > That kind of software is > either 1) run by someone who's not fallen for the "have to have the > latest and greatest" trap, and so probably won't upgrade their OS, or > 2) been orphaned for at least five years. The latter is part of life. Or 3) run by someone who written something really great but somehow deleted the source and forgot the hexadecimal values of the 680x0 instructions (I still what the 6510 opcode $A2 was used for...) >