From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Thu,  8 Apr 2010 14:17:07 -0400
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <e55b342658261282d262be4c242cfb0c@brasstown.quanstro.net>
In-Reply-To: <j2g13426df11004081111mc76408a2v43b92ed98014321c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <d1c554291003291911w4e2cedg3408cf43ecae0ce2@mail.gmail.com>
	<9724ac79049bc26a724978dd60a219b2@gmx.de>
	<y2qd1c554291004071814kaa251c59i9c6006d1a75781e0@mail.gmail.com>
	<4271db67e850d9f036a71500595f0757@brasstown.quanstro.net>
	<j2g13426df11004081111mc76408a2v43b92ed98014321c@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] bootiso.s fixed
Topicbox-Message-UUID: fdebb0e6-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> Never :-)
>
> I still like the current approach because it works but at the same
> time discourages people from using it :-)

i'm sorry, but that's fairly silly.
should we also get rid of the
assembler because we want to
discourage its use?  and clearly
we have successfully minimized
the amount of asm while having
an assembler,.

the amount of 16 bit code that
currently exists would easily justify
the effort in writing a proper assembler.

and consider, interfacing with undi
and other annoying tasks would be a
heck of a lot easier with a proper 4a.

- erik