[Coco] Devastated. Long term OVCC project falls short

[Gene Heskett]

On Monday 21 October 2019 08:36:06 James Jones wrote:

> The standard refers to two kinds of environments a C program can run
> in:
>
>    - a "hosted environment", one with an underlying operating system
>    - a "freestanding environment", without an OS. In a freestanding
>    environment, there's only a small set of library functions one can
> count on having (and hence only a small set of the standard header
> files), and not all types need be supported. What exactly happens upon
> return from main is implementation-defined.
>
> For gcc6809, we're talking a freestanding environment, unless someone
> does a LOT of work.

Chuckle, I note the caps. By free-standing one could assume an embedded 
system that once launched, probably never returns.  The coder would have 
to assume he is responsible for everything, including scanning the 
keyboard for more input.  And before you know it, he had to write a 
complete os. Makes one realize that os-9 was indeed, way ahead of its 
time. But then you knew that when you were helping to write it. The rest 
is as has been said many times now, history. :-)

> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 2:24 AM Gene Heskett <gheskett at shentel.net> 
wrote:
> > On Monday 21 October 2019 02:27:36 William Astle wrote:
> > > On 2019-10-20 11:50 p.m., Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > >> gcc6809 cannot generate OS9 binaries. Its support for position
> > > >> independent code is largely untested and almost certainly
> > > >> incomplete and it doesn't understand the specific requirements
> > > >> of the OS9 environment.
> > > >
> > > > I can confirm that too, its a total waste of time to attempt an
> > > > os9 binary because of that problem using gcc6809. It knows
> > > > nothing about PIC. AFAIAC it should be removed from circulation.
> > >
> > > That last bit is going a bit far. Remember that not everything is
> > > OS9. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the *majority* of
> > > stuff is not OS9, however much a non-trivial fraction of the Coco
> > > community wishes otherwise. (That's not a criticism of OS9 or the
> > > folks who support it.)
> > >
> > > Obviously, you shouldn't try to use a tool for a purpose it is
> > > unsuited for. Thus, gcc6809 should not (and cannot, in fact) be
> > > used for making OS9 binaries. It is simply not suited for that
> > > purpose. That doesn't mean it should be removed from circulation.
> > > It *is* perfectly suitable for other purposes.
> >
> > What os is it usefull on?
> >
> > Cheers, Gene Heskett
> > --
> > "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
> >  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
> > -Ed Howdershelt (Author)
> > If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law
> > respectable. - Louis D. Brandeis
> > Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
> >
> > --
> > Coco mailing list
> > Coco at maltedmedia.com
> > https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>