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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5bcf30769d6d9599 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-09-04 06:26:21 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!psinet-eu-nl!psiuk-p4!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada OS talk (was: ADA os talk) Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:09:39 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9n2jqk$bbk$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 999608980 11636 136.170.200.133 (4 Sep 2001 13:09:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Sep 2001 13:09:40 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:12690 Date: 2001-09-04T13:09:40+00:00 List-Id: Absolutely no objection. If we had an Ada kernel that could be booted off of a floppy into a PC and provided some rudimentary capability to load and run another Ada program on a single processor with a single user, then you'd really have something there. But I think you want to have your Kernel designed such that expanding it to multiple processors, distributed processing, etc., are not somehow hamstrung by your early design decisions. Remember that MS-DOS was a glorified program loader that Microsoft kept trying to breathe new life into, but ultimately had to scrap in favor of NT. It just couldn't be built into a "real" operating system without totally gutting it and starting fresh. There's no point in building an Ada variation of MS-DOS and discovering it has to be trashed because there's no way to make it schedule multiple processors, etc. and remain backward compatible. MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "M. A. Alves" wrote in message news:mailman.999541804.22557.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org... > > The resulting product would be fine, but to get things started in the > current context you should aim low. 1 processor. More over, a specific > processor and architecture (PC Pentium I?). Also, a small set of devices: > ROM, RAM, keyboard, screen. That was the ADX project approach. Even thou > they missed the Ada-France contest, I still think they did something > (guys?) and that the approach was the correct one for an hobby OS. >