Path: utzoo!utgpu!mnetor!frank
From: frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: QNX anyone?
Message-ID: <4632@mnetor.UUCP>
Date: 19 Jun 88 18:59:47 GMT
References: <22273@tis.llnl.gov>
Reply-To: frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick)
Organization: Computer X (CANADA) Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 74

In article <22273@tis.llnl.gov> bae@ati.tis.llnl.gov (Hwa Jin Bae) writes:
>Is anyone out there using QNX?  This message passing OS recently caught
>my eyes again and I would like some detail information on:
>
>	1. Developement environment:
>		How's their C compiler and debugger?

The compiler is very plain vanilla (i.e., not quite full K&R; they don't
support unsigned longs, etc.) and not particularly quick.  It also only
builds small-model tasks, which isn't so terrible if you take advantage of
the message-passing to build lots of small, co-operating tasks.  The most
recent debugger (released this winter) is symbolic and seems nice (e.g.,
it doesn't alter the target imag, just adds lots of supplementary files),
but I haven't used it extensively yet.  They do have a decent make, though.

>		How's their Assembler - or do they have one?

They do, but it's obviously not intended for programming (just as a pass of
the compiler), i.e., practically no documentation.  However, the compiler
lets you embed assembler code and lets you reference variables and the
stack cleanly.

>		If they has an Assembler, is it MASM compatible?

Very much not.

>	2. Device Drivers:
>		What's envolved in writing a device driver for QNX?

Don't know yet, but I will find out in the near future.

>	3. Is it really worth $695 for runtime and development package?

As a consultant, I just get to use it.  Friends of mine like it so much
that they not only buy it but do their DOS development under it.  (QNX
goes out of its way to be compatible with DOS, by reading DOS files,
supporting a separate DOS partition on the disk, running DOS as a subtask,
etc.)  I dislike their editor, but there may be some third-party offerings
(MKS, where are you?).  An ANSI compiler has been announced but I don't
think it's available yet.

>	4. How's their networking (ARCnet board)?

Generally, it's transparent to the programmer, meaning two tasks can
exchange messages without knowing where they are located.  However, if you
do want to know about nodes, you can create tasks remotely, create them
locally and direct their output to another node's terminal, share a file
system, etc.  (BTW, it's not strictly ARCnet, it's a proprietary version
designed and manufactured only by Corman Custom Electronics.)

>	5. Are you developing any products for QNX?

Not personally, but for a client.

>	6. How are you using it?

The current application is a distributed, real-time monitoring system.
(I think that's all I'm allowed to say.  This has nothing to do with
Computer X, by the way.  I just happen to consult here as well and
use their Unix system.)

Actually, since I mentioned it, Computer X is also a distributed,
real-time o/s based on message-passing.  Unlike QNX, it runs on
680x0 machines (surprised?).  It has been written up in Unix World
(since it can share a processor with System V and communicate with it
via messages), among other places which I can't recall.

The recent issue of Dr. Dobbs has an article on QNX by one of its
developers, and an independent review ran in PC Tech Journal some
time last year, I think.
-- 
Frank Kolnick,
UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!mnetor!frank
BELL: (416)-475-8980 ext. 311