Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!rochester!kodak!elmgate!jdg
From: jdg@elmgate.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st,comp.emacs
Subject: Re: GCC: Anyone working on a port?
Message-ID: <602@elmgate.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 3-Apr-87 20:00:25 EST
Article-I.D.: elmgate.602
Posted: Fri Apr  3 20:00:25 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 5-Apr-87 08:30:38 EST
References: <594@elmgate.UUCP> <689@atari.UUCP>
Reply-To: jdg@aurora.UUCP (Jeff Gortatowsky)
Organization: Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, NY
Lines: 40
Xref: utgpu comp.sys.atari.st:2530 comp.emacs:742

In article <689@atari.UUCP> apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) writes:
>in article <594@elmgate.UUCP>, jdg@elmgate.UUCP (Jeff Gortatowsky) says:
>> it working on a non-UNIX no-MMU system.....  but lots of it needs
>> changing.  Remember the ST is FAMOUS for it's horrible memory allocation
>> routines and this compiler seems to love choking down memory.
>
>Please be fair: The ST does have some problems with the GEMDOS routine
>Malloc, but once your program (i.e. gcc) is running, you own all of the
>largest free block of memory in the system.  Your stack pointer is at
>..................
>of that library.  Too bad malloc only takes an int size argument...
>My point is that the system call Malloc is not intended for generalized
>memory management, but rather for system-level allocations for process
>TPAs and the like.
>/----------------------------------------------\
>| Opinions expressed above do not necessarily  |  -- Allan Pratt, Atari Corp.
>| reflect those of Atari Corp. or anyone else. |     ...lll-lcc!atari!apratt
>\----------------------------------------------/

Allan I'm sorry, but I thought I *WAS* being fair.  Allan I'm not
pointing a finger at you (although I am pointing it at Atari).  Atari
(not you) sold me ^&%^% for an OS.  I keep it simply because there is no
way for me to ever get what I spent back. This is normal.  But tell your
boss if he had decided to release a *MINIMALLY TESTED* product, instead
of trying to steal CBM's thunder, he'd get alot more user to user
recommendations and alot more repeat business.  Most of the people here
on the NET know something about computers.  Many recommend them to
others.  You can't gloss over statments like 'well it wasn't intend to
allocate user memory'.  It a bug.  A bad one, just like 40 folders.  One
that should NEVER have gotten out the door.  People get fired for bugs
like that in shipping products (or at least demoted).

It'll wash on CIS but not here...........


-- 
Jeff Gortatowsky       {seismo,allegra}!rochester!kodak!elmgate!jdg
Eastman Kodak Company  
These comments are mine alone and not Eastman Kodak's. How's that for a
simple and complete disclaimer?