Re: A82: CrASH Hacked!!!!(More like the death of OS-82)

To: assembly-82@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A82: CrASH Hacked!!!!(More like the death of OS-82)
From: "Evil Sam" <evil_sam@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 19:02:45 PDT
Delivered-To: assembly-82-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
Reply-To: assembly-82@lists.ticalc.org


>> > After this run in
>> >with you guys and your apparently strong feelings against people
>> exploring
>> >the realm of programming, I therefore won't explore the realm of
>> shells.  I
>> >had no idea that you guys would get so ticked off.  Won't even 
mention
>> the
>> >word shell again.  NOW ARE YOU HAPPY??!?!?!?!?!?!
>>
>>    Jeez, I guess you took people's criticism of your intent to 
release
>> the CrASH source a little too personal. I doubt anybody wouldn't like 
an
>> even better shell. Since you are so fond of O-Shell, why don't you 
try
>> to make an ASh and Oshell compatible shell. Others have tried(Jass 
and
>> CrASH).
>
>IMHO, that would be a waste of time.  OS-82 doesn't have relocation or 
any
>other advanced features, and its not being developed anymore.  If you 
want
>to work on a shell, work on a new, better one.  But I think Ash & CrASH 
are
>pretty good right now.
>
   Personally, I think ASH is the only shell that is needed. I made the 
suggestion because Thomas must really like OS-82. He seems determined to 
resurrect the dead shell. The "ASH to Oshell Development Kit" comes to 
mind. Last September, OS-82 was a decent shell. For one thing, it never 
crashed on me. But now the shell is dead. 
   The only decent game for it that hasn't already been ported to ASH is 
MarioMan, but even that game was very buggy. A Lode-Runner game is 
currently being made for ASH, so what's the point in making a Oshell/ASH 
compatible shell? Looking back, the comment I made was rediculous.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com