Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ncis.llnl.gov!ncis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!ucsd!rutgers!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!alice!debra
From: debra@alice.UUCP (Paul De Bra)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: AT&T 630 terminal - software ??
Message-ID: <8794@alice.UUCP>
Date: 19 Jan 89 06:45:18 GMT
References: <1800005@spdyne> <9434@ihlpb.ATT.COM>
Reply-To: debra@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T, Bell Labs
Lines: 32

In article <9434@ihlpb.ATT.COM> gregg@ihlpb.ATT.COM (Wonderly) writes:
}...
}There are many-MANY things nice about the 630 environment...
}
}As for PC's...
}
}.. if you think that your AST/286 is so good, run the following
}C program, if you get the output
}
}1
}70000
}
}Your C compiler wins my award for effort otherwise you won't get any
}words of sympathy from me...
}
} [program using unsigned ints and malloc deleted]

You seem a bit confused. The 630 is a nice terminal for creating a few
windows and such, but according to your standards its programmability
is lousy, because it won't run your little program. It uses 16 bit ints
and malloc (actualla called alloc) can only allocate 64k, using an
unsigned.

The 630 has its problems, but I don't think your test is adequate for
determining whether any machine is worth getting your sympathy.
Even on a machine with 16 bit ints you can run nice programs.

Paul.
-- 
------------------------------------------------------
|debra@research.att.com   | uunet!research!debra     |
------------------------------------------------------