Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<vm0c7t$140hv$18@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2025 12:23:25 +0000
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <vm0c7t$140hv$18@dont-email.me>
References: <vkjmdg$30kff$1@dont-email.me> <vl8jdq$3st6d$1@dont-email.me>
 <vl8jul$3sqfa$4@dont-email.me> <vl8otk$3splv$3@dont-email.me>
 <vl8qm7$3u6t2$1@dont-email.me> <vl93dl$3vkun$1@dont-email.me>
 <vl9449$3vo6h$3@dont-email.me> <vl9aov$pp7$1@dont-email.me>
 <vla4hr$5n4v$1@dont-email.me> <vlblqj$harb$1@dont-email.me>
 <lttopaFoh2cU8@mid.individual.net> <vle8uk$12sii$2@dont-email.me>
 <c686fb74-4fac-0809-7005-417c76ee0e3b@example.net>
 <nbReP.633803$oR74.271654@fx16.iad>
 <2e17ec15-582f-5a71-84e5-d4d490274270@example.net>
 <vlj20k$25740$9@dont-email.me>
 <7454fa51-3534-2584-2197-90613efb2091@example.net>
 <XPSdnbpbLvJvxeL6nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 <vloss6$3e1r9$5@dont-email.me> <vlp4pc$3fpg0$7@dont-email.me>
 <vlpc44$3h48e$4@dont-email.me> <vlqi4a$3sp5m$2@dont-email.me>
 <ludkg3Fcu8aU4@mid.individual.net> <vltmrd$jnea$2@dont-email.me>
 <lug0u7FotnoU3@mid.individual.net>
 <j6-dnefHsrFokx76nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 <GfOgP.20181$G93a.3099@fx05.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2025 13:23:26 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2f926649ad379acaad6b98eb2a7a7167";
	logging-data="1180223"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19gRsy70WYOTwRXRlZ7zjCiwp8U/deEi0E="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:R8xtmVyp7ZRi4Wu3o6tPnCMBJjk=
In-Reply-To: <GfOgP.20181$G93a.3099@fx05.iad>
Content-Language: en-GB

On 12/01/2025 12:07, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2025-01-12, 186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
> 
>>     The 8086 would have been better, but the extra wiring
>>     apparently would have pushed up the price too much
>>     according to some old interview with an IBM guy.
>>     They didn't KNOW it would be super-successful, so they
>>     kinda hedged their bets, split the diff. 640k banks
>>     were a hell of a lot better than 64k banks.
> 
> The 64K barrier was alive and well on the 8086/8.
> I wrote a lot of horrible code to deal with large arrays.
> Then there were all the memory models: tiny, small, large,
> huge... yuck.

Well most of my code ran in 64k.  Ultimately you could use large models 
- the compiler took care of all that crap if you did.

IIRC it all vanished as an issue with te 386...

"he ability for a 386 to be set up to act like it had a flat memory 
model in protected mode despite the fact that it uses a segmented memory 
model in all modes was arguably the most important feature change for 
the x86 processor family until AMD released the x86-64 in 2003"


> 
>>     The instructions for the 8088 were "familiar" to
>>     anyone who did the 8008/8080 and not TOO far
>>     from Z-80 sensibility - so I think that cinched Intel
>>     as the maker. WISH they'd used the 68000s. Ever
>>     see the Sage boxes ... gone alas before I could
>>     afford one .......
> 
> I got into the Amiga and enjoyed the 68000 that way.
> 
I coded Z80, 8088 and 6809 in my time. In assembler.
Once the 386 came in it was simply a matter of using 'C' everywhere. and 
let thecompiler sort out the mess.


-- 
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the 
urge to rule it.”
– H. L. Mencken