A89: "doors" mode

To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Subject: A89: "doors" mode
From: "Scott Noveck" <noveck@pluto.njcc.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 23:16:42 -0400
Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org


I'm starting to get annoyed at seeing everyplace refer to a program needed a
kernel as a "doors program."  It was bad enough when Xavier decided to make
his include file use doorsos::rom_call rather than tios::rom_call; now this
is all sticking everywhere.

With all these new (and, IMHO, superior) shells coming out, how about
calling these "kernel programs" rather than "doors programs" (as opposed to
"nostub programs," which could also probably use a better name)?  Seeing
this stuff plastered all over TI-GCC lib is just too much. . .

For starters, how about copying doors.h to a new file, kernel.h, and
changing doors.h to a single line of "#include <kernel.>"?  This would keep
compatibility and stop nagging me.  I'm probably just nitpicking, but I hate
to see people just use new versions of doors rather than more stable kernels
because doors is older. . .

On a slightly related side note: has anyone else noticed any graphical
differences in their programs using the TEOS graphlib?  It looks like the
TEOS graphlib is not displaying some text for me, while the original
graphlib treats it properly and does display the text.  This may be caused
solely by a speed difference from extensive use of graphlib::horiz_line and
a single instance of graphlib::put_sprite, but something should flash on the
screen which isn't. . .

    -Scott

Follow-Ups:

A89: Re: "doors" mode

From: "Sebastian Reichelt" <SebastianR@gmx.de>