Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!rochester!cornell!batcomputer!rpi!rpi.edu!deven From: deven@pawl.rpi.edu (Deven Corzine) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: grrr...BCPL.... Message-ID: Date: 8 May 89 06:54:46 GMT References: <14868@louie.udel.EDU> Sender: usenet@rpi.edu Organization: RPI Public Access Workstation Lab, Troy NY Lines: 53 In-reply-to: wzg91@ttacs1.ttu.edu's message of 7 May 89 14:21:12 GMT In article <14868@louie.udel.EDU> wzg91@ttacs1.ttu.edu (BROWN, KEVIN) writes: >Already we have one person (Deven Corzine) working on a Un*x >programmer's interface for the Amiga. I suspect he'd be elated if he >were allowed to rewrite DOS! Ah, name recognition. :-) Rewriting DOS? [Actually, I generally prefer to say "AmigaDOS" simply because PC users always say "DOS" meaning "MS-DOS" and assume it's about the only DOS worth thinking about... and I'd rather not be grouped with PC users... :-) Anyway...] While I'd certainly like to be able to rewrite the "official" dos of the Amiga, to be distributed by Commodore-Amiga, it doesn't seem to likely, at this point. Perhaps eventually. :-) On the other hand, were I to write a new filesystem which could completely replace AmigaDOS, and yet still run concurrently with AmigaDOS if you wish, as part of my Amigix project... [an idea I am giving serious consideration] Well, if it is clearly superior in all ways, but for source code compatibility [and still have AmigaDOS itself available if you really WANT that] and have the interface be one similar to the Unix model (probably with extensions)... Can you say "de facto standard?" Look at ARP. Prime example. ARP is clearly superior in most respects to AmigaDOS, and its use is therefore quite widespread. ARexx is another example. While commercial, it is nevertheless well on its way to being a de facto standard for the Amiga. Now, say I were to have a shell which is a superset of Unix sh, csh, tcsh, ksh, et al. (or mostly a superset) and also supported communication between programs over ARexx ports? I'm not saying I'd necessarily attempt to duplicate the script language in such a shell, but allowing it to coordinate programs as ARexx can, [those which ARexx can] would give the shell the [apparently] most-used and most-wanted feature of ARexx, while encouraging even more people to include ARexx ports in their programs... Of course, there are those who believe I can't do it, or that it simply can't be done. I disagree. But only time can prove who shall have the last laugh. >God knows he seems competent enough to do so... Why, thanks! :-) Deven -- shadow@[128.113.10.2] Deven T. Corzine (518) 272-5847 shadow@[128.113.10.201] 2346 15th St. Pi-Rho America deven@rpitsmts.bitnet Troy, NY 12180-2306 <> "Simple things should be simple and complex things should be possible." - A.K.