🚀 go-pugleaf

Date:          Sat, 12 Apr 86 09:12 EST
From:          (1) <RDROYA01@ULKYVX.BITNET>
Organization:  University of Louisville
Subject:       How close to ALCYON C is TOS?
To:            info-atari16@su-score.stanford.edu
X-Original-To: info-atari16@su-score.stanford.edu

Quote of the week: "What do you do when the people you knew were the plastic
                    that melted and the chromium too? / Who are the brain
                    police?"
                                                            -frank zappa


I have received a lot of buzzing about an entry I had on the net.
RUMORS was the name.  In it I asked if TOS was really cp/m68k.  No
it is not everyone said.  But I'll bet it's written in ALCYON C
because the file header format and the exception format are too close
for coincidence.  I didn't say why I asked at first, but perhaps I should
have.  I write a lot of cpm-68k programs, and simply wondered whether the
object format (output from as68) was compatible.  DRI claims rights to all
of the cpm-68k development tools, but they are actually third party
products -- i'll bet the same third party products that made cpm-68k, Tos,
and that are distributed in the developer's kit.

THE FOLLOWING IS HEARSAY FROM A TRUSTED SOURCE

David Betz writes about developing xlisp for the Atari using MicroEmacs
under CP/M-68K.  This was said to be in the _BYTE_ section of *Compuserve*.
So, has anyone used the crippled cp/m-68k *and* TOS who can explain why
header format is the same and so forth and yet TOS was to have been designed
from the ground up?

RDROYA01@ULKYVX.BITNET