🚀 go-pugleaf

(This has to do with the thread about about documented source for TOS etc.
where Allan Pratt makes an argument involving developers taking advantage of
"features" (my word, definitely not his). Sorry for not quoting)

What I don't understand is why don't the excellent development team at Atari
just go ahead and make the changes and break all the programs that don't follow
the rules. I'm not a developer, but I doubt that there was any documentation
that said 2 successive mallocs would yield neighboring blocks. (same for other
examples)

It seems to me (IMHO) that if developers keep taking advantage of
"side-effects" and Atari tries it's best to keep programs from breaking,
eventually, you won't be able to revise TOS at all.

I mean, if a program breaks because a programmer takes advantage of an
undocumented or illegal "feature" which isn't there at the next os revision,
isn't that the programmer's fault?

Also, about working around bugs in TOS, there is a legal way of checking TOS
version, right? So, can't you write your program so it uses a "workaround" for
TOS 1.0 but does things the right way for TOS 1.4 (sort of like how Ian
Lepore's GEMFAST bindings simulates the TOS 1.4 file_selector if your TOS is
<1.4) or whatever the case may be?

(I think they're right. Maybe Atarians ARE militant :-) )

						John
                                   v067majp@ubvmsc.cc.buffalo.edu