----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Caetano" <daniel(_en_)caetano(_punto_)eng(_punto_)br>
To: <hispamsx(_en_)yahoogroups(_punto_)com>
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: [hispamsx] Hello World !!!! para MNBIOS
On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 14:14:58 -0300, Flyguille wrote:
MNBIOS kernel already is able to switch bettwen 2 or 4 video pages
(depending of the screen mode ofcource) and the windowing system is capable
to host any windows on any page...that is the kernel.... the User interface
in his basic form only use one, but following that concept is possible do
up
to 4 desktops if i want to do that, right now? i don't want lose my time in
"make up".
And i are talking of BITMAPS (screen 5, 6, 7 y 8) and not chrs matrix......
ofcourse, is more simply save 1k or 2k of text matrix instead a 32k or 64k.
But then you are not targeting expandability. You are tying your BIOS to
the MSX system we have nowadays. You are just packing the existent features
"in nice functions". This could be done creating a simple library.
The idea is create a standard programming interface to allow to separate the
aplications from the chips programming... if this version is compiled to use
by example a v9938 that not mean than this is limited... sure i will made in
the future a kernel version for v9990... then the aplication made for v9938
kernel will run allways on v9990 version....or another VDP chip ... because
is change the kernel version... not the aplication code....Ofcource if the
aplication want to access directly to the VDP REGS or VRAM then you got a
aplication chip based.
A graphical enviroment is that where you got the capability of program
objects like buttons...text box ... and then use it...
!? If this is your only requirement for a GUI, then you also could
pack it as a simple library. This is only border-services into a GUI,
not its primary functions.
NO! back of all objects will be all a structure than support that and
support the adding of all other kind of objects and linking for use this
object in dinamic way with multiple object instances.
on the MNBIOS all objects will come in driver library implement.... the
kernel foresee this way to work for that support functions for calculate
coordiantes inside a window between other things like the windowing
instance
support.
Primary function is: GPI (with device contexts), message queues and so on.
You can build a GUI even without specifying buttons or anything. They
are just windows (and this is everything a GUI cares about: managing
Windows display and data entry). And relative position is just the
iceberg tip when talking about context-windows.
256x192? screen 2 o 4? that is a crap. you will lose much time calculating
the pattern byte of a coordinates. Bad desition.
Every screen from 1 to 5 and 8 to 12 can be displayed in 256x192,
not only screen 2 and 4.
Yes i know that, but is not the default mode.
On MNBIOS the programs will usefull the graphic environments if the
aplication want.
So do UZIX about X-Wind. Text and Graphical apps can coexist. Text
apps can run in graphical terminals too.
Anyway I had done the beggings of a full-ASM Graphical User Interface
for MSX-DOS2. It's called Breeze and its page can be found here:
http://www.caetano.eng.br/msxpage/
I stopped because I was bored with its performance: even in full ASM
programming, V99x8 is damn too slow!
And how hell i made a FAST graphic enviroment on v9938????? Just write
"FCB"
on DEMO mnbios version for see how fast is.
Of course it is. Pretty fast. So fast that even when writing a plain
filled
box I can see it drawing. Run Breeze and you will see it. And please, do
not say it's bad programming. It could be improved, yes. But the graphical
display (VDP "fast" commands) are too slow... urgh!
NO NO!!!, count only kernel functions plus I/O native drivers
functions....like COM / DISK / BDOS (BDOS on mnbios is MDOS).
Maybe I'm misinformed... But who said "number of functions" make a
OS better? If this was a real statement, Windows NT would be the
better system ever. And everybody that really knows anything about
software engineering knows it is the biggest piece of crap in the
whole history.
NOOO, the OS better not depend about number of functions.... it depend about
what you can do in it, plus how fast is, plus how easy to programming
is.....plus how easy is to implement new hardware... plus how easy is to
expand it.
Anyway, why COM / DISK / BDOS functions can be counted and
TCP/IP cannot? This makes no sense to me. No sense at all.
I not say COM , i say CON
CON / DISK / BDOS are generally native drivers...
TCP/IP if UZIX got it as native... you can count... if it is implemente in a
external driver... not.
greetings Daniel, now... why you not write in spanish?
[]'s
Daniel Caetano
*HispaMSX. La mailing-list de MSX en castellano*
Para cualquier duda: hispamsx-owner(_en_)yahoogroups(_punto_)com
Web de lista: http://www.hispamsx.org
Enlaces a Yahoo! Grupos
Para visitar tu grupo en la web, accede a:
http://es.groups.yahoo.com/group/hispamsx/
Para cancelar tu suscripción en este grupo, envía
un mensaje en blanco a:
hispamsx-unsubscribe(_en_)yahoogroups(_punto_)com
El uso que hagas de Yahoo! Grupos está sujeto a
las Condiciones del servicio de Yahoo!:
http://es.docs.yahoo.com/info/utos.html
