[Info-vax] Hard links on VMS ODS5 disks

[Dave Froble]

On 7/20/2023 8:20 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2023-07-19, Arne Vajhøj <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> On 7/19/2023 1:32 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> On 2023-07-19, Dave Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>>>> On 7/18/2023 10:01 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>> On 7/18/2023 9:25 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>>>>> Do you also claim that the executable code would also be smaller?
>>>>>
>>>>> No.
>>>>
>>>> Then, what would be the benefit?
>>>
>>> For one thing, if you didn't have to worry about the Macro-32 and
>>> Bliss crap, the VMS port would have been completed years ago.
>>
>> Are you sure?
>>
>> It is not my impression that the various VMS ISA migrations has
>> caused rewrite of lots of Macro-32 and Bliss.
>>
>> My impression is that:
>> - they create the Macro-32 and Bliss compilers for the new platform
>> - they compile the old Macro-32 and Bliss code dating back from the
>>    70's and 80's
>> - the new code get written in C (plus a little bit of native
>>    assembler where needed)
>>
>
> You have missed what I am saying above, so I may have been too subtle.
> Let me reword it: If VMS didn't have any Macro-32 or Bliss code in it,
> and didn't need to support them as application level programming languages,
> VMS would look much more internally like any another OS written in C does,
> and the port would have been completed years ago.

It is obvious to the casual observer that some assembly language "tricks" would 
make an assembly language compiler a bit (or more) tricky.  Supporting Macro-32, 
a basically 32 bit language (these days), is a significant task.  Yeah, yeah, I 
know, Macro-32 can do 64 bit stuff.  However, it is not just for VMS, but also 
for all those applications written in Macro-32 that are still in use.  Now, I'm 
rather sure Simon feels they should be re-implimented in another language.  I 
have to wonder whether the users of those apps feel the same way.  I doubt it. 
Nice of Simon to assign significant work to others.

Similar observations for Bliss.

> As of this month, the VMS port has been going on for 9 years and it is
> still not finished.

Better than abandoned ...

> It doesn't take 9 years to port Linux to a brand-new architecture, even
> if you first have to implement the compilers for that brand-new architecture.

Not the same thing at all.

For those with Linux apps, there are already platforms that can be used.  The 
same cannot be said for VMS.  So VMS has additional needs, as in needed, and 
just might be more work.  Linux however, just isn't needed on additional platforms.

I can also imagine a "brand-new architecture" where a port of Linux just might 
not be so easy.


-- 
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef at tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486