Path: utzoo!dptcdc!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!apple!oliveb!amiga!cbmvax!daveh From: daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: UNIX vs. Amiga speeds Message-ID: <6625@cbmvax.UUCP> Date: 18 Apr 89 21:28:25 GMT References: <22977@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> Distribution: na Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA Lines: 32 in article <22977@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>, michael@maui.cs.ucla.edu (michael gersten) says: > In article <6490@cbmvax.UUCP> daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) writes: > :In article <0912.AA0912@julie>, mcr@julie.UUCP (Michael Richardson) says: > :> Out of curiosity, why weren't the 500 and 2000 just released > :> with 68010s? > :No software change would be necessary. > Wrong. The 68010 has one instruction privleged that was not privledged > on the 68000. This kills early versions of Lattice's math library, > and some games. > Michael No, you're wrong. So are any programs that have your aforementioned problem. Since before AmigaOS V1.0, there's been a system call that takes care of the incompatibility you mention, that of the 68000's MOVE SR, versus the 68010 and greater MOVE CC,. Exec solves this problem with the GetCC() function call. Any program that uses either direct instruction is not conforming to the Amiga OS specifications, and as such is not a valid Amiga program. So I stand by my original contention that no software change is necessary. Any program that has a dependency on this issue also has a bug that need fixing, plain and simple. It indicates that the programmer just didn't read the system documentation. -- Dave Haynie "The 32 Bit Guy" Commodore-Amiga "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: D-DAVE H BIX: hazy Amiga -- It's not just a job, it's an obsession