[Info-vax] Dave Cutler, Prism, DEC, Microsoft, etc.

[toby]

On Nov 8, 5:32 am, Neil Rieck <n.ri... at sympatico.ca> wrote:
> On Nov 7, 9:27 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a... at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Neil Rieck wrote:
> > > Since any idiot can put up a web page these days, you know it all
> > > can't be true. So imagine my surprise when I bumped into this:
>
> > >http://radsoft.net/rants/20040831,00.shtml
>
> > > <quote>Dave always wanted to rewrite VMS in C. He hated Unix but loved
> > > C. As soon as he'd finished VMS he suggested the rewrite. He was
> > > turned down flat. Several years later he found himself in Seattle and
> > > essentially was doing the rewrite in C when word came DEC were tired
> > > of him.</quote>
>
> > > This article contains lots of other (possibly) questionable facts, but
> > > think about the statement above "rewrite VMS in C". If this had
> > > happened, we would have VMS or OpenVMS on any platform including
> > > x86-64
>
> > If the various owners of VMS had believed in the market for
> > VMS/x86-64, then I don't think getting Bliss and Macro-32 for
> > x86-64 would have been the showstopper. My guess is that it
> > would have been a small part of the overall project. Porting
> > an OS to a new platform is more than just building the
> > source code.
>
> > Arne
>
> True, but if Cutler wanted to immediately write VMS in C then I'm
> thinking he must had a good reason for it. We all know that UNIX
> enjoyed an immediate debugging when it was first rewritten from
> assembler to "C".

And subsequently on every port: by 1977 the Interdata 8/32 was at
least the fourth UNIX-in-C architecture after the PDP-11 in 1972, the
Honeywell 6000 "less than a year later", and IBM 370 "shortly
thereafter"[1]) - Johnson's compiler having been adapted to "System/
370 under both OS and TSS, the Honeywell 6000, the Interdata 8/32, the
SEL86, the Data General Nova[2] and Eclipse, the DEC VAX-11/780, and a
Bell System processor. Versions are in progress for the Intel 8086
microprocessor and other machines... The degree of portability
achieved by this compiler is satisfying."[1]

Likewise Linux must have benefited a great deal from Alpha having been
an early non-x86 port.

> I wonder (in hindsight) if all these secondary and
> tertiary components (like BLISS and MACRO) might be an indication of
> too many chefs in the VMS kitchen :-)
>
> NSR

1. "Portability of C Programs and the UNIX System," S.C. Johnson and
D.M. Ritchie (1977).
http://reference.kfupm.edu.sa/content/p/o/portability_of_c_programs_and_the_unix_s_91832.pdf

2. No mean feat on this word addressed architecture - cf Chris Torek's
posts over the years.