Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | psydk's commentslogin

After enjoying coding on 680x0 in my youth and later being frustrated by x86, I acclaim that new ISA. There is a design decision I'm curious about but I could not find related information. How did they come with the names "x0, x1, x2..." for general purpose registers, instead of the more conventional "r0, r1, r2..."?


x for "fixed point". r for "register" is too vague.


My question will probably sound naïve because of my lack of knowledge of the Macintosh, but Macintosh hardware nowadays seems to be the same than PCs. So what prevent Intel, AMD or nVidia to propose a driver for this platform in the same way they do it for Linux and Windows? Is there a legal reason? A technical reason?


My limited guess as a OpenGL developer on Os X is that it has something to do with Apple prodividing a software OpenGL -implementation also, so maybe they don't want to pour in the work in that to support the more recent advances in OpenGL ?

Or maybe they're just focusing on the Metal -implementation, and iOS more specifically.

Currently the OpenGL stack is years behind on OS X compared to Windows or Linux, Os X supports only version 4.1 (released in 2010) with some 4.2 extensions thrown in.

I've yet to come across a good reason. If somebody knows, would be nice to know also.


> I've yet to come across a good reason. If somebody knows, would be nice to know also.

It's not a good reason, but a reason nevertheless: it's fair to say Apple likes to lock in developers to its platform[1]. Encouraging the use of Metal and discouraging OpenGL increases the lock-in effect.

1. My Google skills are failing me, but a few years ago there was a blog-post by an app developer who used to get lots of support from Apple while their featured app was iOS-exclusive. The day the app was ported it to Android, Apple stopped responding to their queries.


The Ubuntu document is from 2012 and the merge is not done on 16.04. How can we know if the change is still planned, and when? Is there a roadmap somewhere?


I've been able to successfully use / in the Win32 API with the exception of CreateProcess. I think the reason is that when you start an executable you may pass command line arguments starting with /


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: