From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,984e922902f4f4ee
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: tconiam@aol.com (TConiam)
Subject: Re: Can Ada by popularized faster ?
Date: 1997/10/30
Message-ID: <19971030031701.WAA19264@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 285875181
References: <3451FB80.CA0179F1@montana.campus.mci.net>
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-10-30T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


>Dave Wood wrote:
>
>> 4. The AmigaOS was written in (I think) B, or BPL,
>> or something like that.  The OS was quite wonderful
>> and well ahead of its time as a desktop OS.  Didn't
>> do much for the underlying language, though.
>
>As I recall, the kernel was written in BCPL, which was a cousin of C, I
>think (both derived from B?). The windowing system and other outer
>layers were written in C. (I think the kernel was written in England
>while the rest was done in America)  

Yes,  Amiga DOS was written in BCPL (precursor? of B) in England and the Amiga
 Workbench was done in Motorola 68K assembly (now there's a processor, no silly
 segments and such) and partly in C in the USA.

The "Kernel"  was mostly hand coded assembly it think, while the libraries were
 in C.

This all just goes to show that superior technology like the Amiga (high res.
 color graphics, preemptive multitasking, sound, coprocessors, etc.) can be
 seriously wounded by bad marketing and lack of exposure.