My Vintage Dream PC

[Archimedes' Lever]

On Fri, 05 Jun 2009 18:54:39 -0700, Archimedes' Lever

<<<<<Snip>>>>>

Archie calling John a liar?

What about your claim of celibacy Archie? Is that a truthful
statement?

Cite?

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

Obvious; but why?

John

If it is all assembled from small chunks, then any error has to be
within one such chunk.

You are thick!

 

[Bill Pechter]

Buffered mode I/O on the PDP-10 was an asynchronous operation. By that
I mean the user mode program could fill/empty one buffer while the
monitor was emptying/filling other buffers in the buffer ring. If
this approach is used, DOS would not have had to pull an entire
file into memory for an edit.

I don't believe dos had to pull an entire file into memory for an edit.

I believe this was a problem with whatever editor you used.
I know I edited files bigger than memory on DOS.

This missing functionality caused lots of "buffer overruns" which
overwrote monitor code when reading a very large file.

I'd like to see the memory dump showing this happening.

If something overwrote memory resident dos code it was a huge bug.

/BAH

Bill

 

[jmfbahciv]

Bullshit, you lying, retarded bastard.

It did every time it BSODed.

/BAH

 

[jmfbahciv]

You are about as lost as it gets.

I guess you have no experience.

/BAH

 

[jmfbahciv]

True. I like smaller systems - some analog stuff, a few FPGAs,
thousands of lines of uP code - because that can be shipped
bug-free... if you really are willing to do it right.

The paradox is that big systems are assembled from small chunks,
usually smaller than one on my apps, but have bugs. The bugs are
usually *within* those small chunks.

No. Those are the easy bugs to fix. The hairier ones are
the deadly embraces, CATCH-22s, etc. There isn't any code
bugs but timing bugs.

/BAH

 

[jmfbahciv]

How big was the TOPS-10 monitor?

I'll take that answer in words, since bytes hadn't been invented back
then.

Don't know. It depended on what the customer needed.

/BAH

 

[jmfbahciv]

Could be, but once NTP starts up that will quickly be corrected.

How many bits have been tied to the wrong date/time by then? That
was a serious problem which we had to think about.

/BAH

 

[jmfbahciv]

I don't believe dos had to pull an entire file into memory for an edit.

I believe this was a problem with whatever editor you used.
I know I edited files bigger than memory on DOS.


I'd like to see the memory dump showing this happening.

If something overwrote memory resident dos code it was a huge bug.

It happened to me a lot. I finally managed to get the keyboard code
in the place that kept getting overwritten. Then the keyboard would
freeze up and I could safely, [tongue in cheek], reboot the system
without DOS going all panicy and trying to rewrite the UFD headers
(user file directory) before BSODing.

/BAH

 

[jmfbahciv]

I belive what she's driving at is that it (DOS) didn't, and still
doesn't, support making what you need available as it's needed.

Some (perhaps many?) early editors under DOS did, in fact, bring the
entire file into memory to edit. In fact, I still use one almost daily
(in a command sessions under XP or Vista) that does this. But by no
means did all of them. I don't recall one ever doing other than saying
"file too large" or words to that effect then bailing out, though.
Still, I'm sure there probably were some that just kept on reading even
once theyd' run out of RAM.

IIRC, most of the problems happened while in Windows. Windows had
no respect for any other code in core, including the monitor code
and device drivers.

/BAH

 

[Richard Cranium]

Cite?

You know you said it. Why ask for a citation?

 

[Richard Cranium]

On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 00:33:42 -0700, Archimedes' Lever

If it is all assembled from small chunks, then any error has to be
within one such chunk.

You are thick!

Kinda like you ... a bunch of small turds piled up to make an Archie.
Are there many errors in the chunks of shit that sum to you?

 

[StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt]

I guess you have no experience.

/BAH

That is another one of your problems. You guess too much.

 

[Joe Pfeiffer]

[email protected] (Bill Pechter)
writes:

I don't believe dos had to pull an entire file into memory for an edit.

I believe this was a problem with whatever editor you used.
I know I edited files bigger than memory on DOS.

Right -- but I don't think there were many editors, particularly in the
early pre-XT days, that had the capability of working with files bigger
than memory.

I'd like to see the memory dump showing this happening.

If something overwrote memory resident dos code it was a huge bug.

There was no memory protection on an 8088. I didn't spend enough time
on MS-DOS to remember encountering this, but it was easily possible.

 

[Peter Flass]

[email protected] (Bill Pechter)
writes:


Right -- but I don't think there were many editors, particularly in the
early pre-XT days, that had the capability of working with files bigger
than memory.

I remember one wonderful (not!) PDP-8 editor that worked on a buffer at
a time, and the user had to explicitly save the current buffer and read
the next after doing editing in it. There may have been CP/M editors
similarly structured. I don't remember any for DOS, though there may
have been some.

 

[Richard Cranium]

On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 11:14:57 -0700, StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt

That is another one of your problems. You guess too much.

No guessing necessary when it comes to you, Archie. You are a
certified asshole!

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

I have also seen Cranium ask you
directly to explain it in light of other statemenst you have made
regarding your supposed womanizing talents that have you showing
massive powers of satisfaction and rejuvenation.

Sorry, you retarded bastard, but being good at satisfying a woman is
not "womanizing" you stupid little twit.

So it is you that is the fucking dolt.

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

I say ****
off.

Nobody give a fat flying **** what you say, dumbass!

 

[Joe Pfeiffer]

I remember one wonderful (not!) PDP-8 editor that worked on a buffer
at a time, and the user had to explicitly save the current buffer and
read the next after doing editing in it. There may have been CP/M
editors similarly structured. I don't remember any for DOS, though
there may have been some.

The editor on the Data General Nova clone I worked on briefly while an
undergrad had an editor in which you had to explicitly

1) start editor, specifying file to edit.
2) load file to edit.
3) make modifications
4) save file

If you skipped step 2, and the only modifications you had to make were
to add some lines to the file, you learned about it next time you opened
the file.

When this happened less than a week before the term project was due, you
had just received a lesson in making backups.

 

[Richard Cranium]

Nobody give a fat flying **** what you say, dumbass!

Wrong again pissface. Lot's of people care what almost everyone here
says ... except you. Everyone knows what a wimp asswipe you really
are. Orville may be on to the real problem with you Archie. Your
being a closet faggot makes more sense when trying to explain your
tenacious avoidance of explaining your celibacy admission and your
fear of the puzzle. Do you really fantasize a mans hairy ass instead
of a voluptuous babe? You are a sicko Archie. Do you have to
register with the local authorities wghere you live?