[Info-vax] VMS internals design, was: Re: BASIC and AST routines

[VAXman- at SendSpamHere.ORG]

In article <snrbgf$7td$3 at dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>On 2021-11-25, VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG <VAXman- at SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote:
>> In article <sno4v1$efp$1 at dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>>>
>>>Compared to later operating system designs the internal design
>>>of VMS is a direct product of the 1970s mindset because it is
>>>ugly, hard to alter, not modular, full of internal hacks such
>>>as jumping internally all over the place and was designed when
>>>it was getting close to the end of when assembly language was
>>>considered to be both an acceptable system implementation language
>>>and an application language.
>>
>> What's hard to alter?  Many people say an alternator is difficult to
>> replace.  I did one two weeks ago.
>>
>
>Have you ever looked inside the Linux internals to see how clean
>they are compared to VMS internals ?

Statement such as yours are purely unfounded without proofs.  What is
so *unclean* in the VMS internals?  I've never seen a book written as
well as the OpenVMS Internal and Data Structures Manual for Linux.  I
demand a proof but not before you answer my question that you have so
completely ignored or skirted around since the inception of this long
thread.

-- 
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker    VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.