To: perot@pallas.amp.uni-hannover.de
Subject: Re: [2] New STiK, more info and binaries                                            


On Fri, 27 Dec 1996 10:52:44 Peter Rottengatter <perot wrote: 
>
>On Thu, 26 Dec 1996, Ronald Andersson wrote:

----- snip ----- re: ST-Guide for new STiK docs
>> 
>> Great!  Most documentation becomes much clearer when presented as hypertext,
>> with the ability to have cross-ref links in all appropriate places etc.
>> I've been using ST-Guide for quite a long time now, and updated to the latest
>> version (written this month) just a few days ago.
>
>Is it worth the upgrade ? What are the improvements compared to ST-Guide 
>from the 2nd of August 1995 ?

I think it is worth it, but you must of course judge this for yourself.

Here are a few excerpts from the 'history' of the new changes:

Extended iconbar menu, now includes bookmark and catalog commands.
Bookmark commands also available as F1..F10  (shifted=>set  unshifted=>goto)
New variable "MARKFILE" allows user defined bookmark files.
Iconify optimized better for MTOS and MagiC.
Problems with multiple pictures in a row fixed.
Problems with slider in long pages fixed.
TOS-subprograms now started via VT52 in MagiC, without AV server.
Error checking of HYP-files improved.
Positioning errors with non-standard font sizes fixed.
Errors with case sensitive file systems fixed.
Keyboard PageUp and PageDown implemented.
Scrolling improved.
Problems with long-name file selectors fixed.
16-colour graphics implemented. (Dithered B/W if screen has less than 16)
Alternative font variable, allows font switch by Alt-Z.  (eg: ISO Latin-1)

Like I said, these are just _excerpts_ from the list of changes, and I didn't
even mention any of the many changes to HCP.


----- snip ----- re: Harun and HSMODEM
>> 
>> Good !  As for early TOS support, I myself have split feelings about this.
>> Some of the limitations of TOS 1.0 and 1.2 are extremely limiting on the
>> freedom to do things we have come to take for granted in later TOS versions.
>> My rule of thumb is that if such support can be achieved without limiting the
>> usefulness of the software for 'modern' users, and without increasing the size
>> very much, then I favor it.  In all other cases I am against it.
>
>I feel similar about this. As you might have noticed from the discussion 
>with Martin on the Pexec, I don't even feel like working around bugs and 
>problems if they produce just a little inconvenience only to the TOS 1.0 
>and TOS 1.2 people. Thanks for your support during the ongoing discussion 
>with Martin.

Well, the Pexec issue is at least partly a matter of taste, like you said.
The IP-module issue on the other hand is definitely not so.  I think he has
already realized his mistake, since he started talking about meaning a form
of 'modularity' affecting only the theoretical design, not the implementation.
This does not match what he said earlier, but that's not important.


>The problem with Harun is that he wants to talk me into using the GEMDOS 
>interface. He does not accept that we abandoned the GEMDOS approach for 
>good reasons, and that we'd need to throw away the interupt driven back-
>ground operation, which in my opinion is one of the major improvements
>of the new concept.

I don't quite follow you here.  At some levels we must use GEMDOS or BIOS
in order to reach the device drivers.  The GEMDOS interface is a bit more
'expensive' than the BIOS interface, but does have some advantages.
AFAIK it is perfectly legal to mix the use of BIOS and GEMDOS, since many
GEMDOS functions are often implemented by calling BIOS functions.

I don't see why he should have any opinion (least of all a negative one) on
how we choose to implement the STiK threader.  If he says we 'need' to throw
it out, he'd better have a very good reason for it to not be ignored.  And for
us actually to do it, he would have to present us with a better alternative.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regards:  Ronald Andersson                     mailto:dlanor@oden.se
                                               http://www.oden.se/~dlanor
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
