20 Jul
2009
20 Jul
'09
3:47 p.m.
Timo Kreuzer wrote:
Wine emulates the kernel through a server. Of cause we
don't use it,
because it has a totally different design.
Says who? So far, and only counting official implementations, Win32 has
been implemented as:
- a shared-memory user mode subsystem (Windows 95, 98)
- a RPC user mode subsystem (Windows NT 3)
- a kernel mode subsystem (Windows NT 4 and later)
- ??? (Windows CE)
We have an NT kernel and
every kernel developer would eat me alive if I tried to put a single
line of wine code into our kernel. It's considered crap there.
Wine code has to pass quality reviews and test suites. ReactOS code only
has to pass the warmth-and-fuzziness test. Wine can prove their code is
right, ReactOS is based on code that feels right
The idea that Wine code is better than ReactOS code really needs to die.
Compared to theirs, our code is sloppy, highly unprofessional and often
inexplicable. We copy the form but tend to completely miss the intent.
Wine development is test-driven and entirely based on intent and end
results, while our development model is, apparently, to dick around in
our spare time pretending we work at Microsoft
How do you expect display drivers to work at all?
NT display drivers used to run in user mode with the same identical API,
and probably the same ABI. I'm sure Aleksey will do just fine
More hacks on top of the huge pile of hacks? And how
do you deal with
missing functionality in wine code? Shove more code in there? Or ignore
it, like if wine doesn't need it, we also don't need it? Or again fork
the code?
I would sell my mother to Carthage for even a fraction of the kind of
application support that Wine enjoys, thank you. My only gripe with
arwinss is that Aleksey beat me to the first landmark controversial side
project