Re: [MiNT] strange memory violation

[Evan Langlois <Evan@CoolRunningConcepts.com>]

On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 11:12 +0100, Miro Kropacek wrote:
> All your arguments come from the fact _if_ my software crash it will 
> hang the system. I agree, it isn't the good practice but let's say on 
> some alternative:

Not at all.  You also have to look at issues such as portability to
other hardware and multitasking.  If you grab some hardware timer, you
could stop some other task from grabbing the same timer.  You could
argue that you can do this in such a way that other applications can
also get at the system, but do you really want a multitude of
applications all having their own code run when an interrupt fires?

As you devise better and better schemes to both allow shared access to
resources, provide simpler and more error-proof ways to access these
resources, and provide for both safety and efficiency in a multitasking
operating system, you'll find that you are writing a kernel!

Don't tell me you don't care about multitasking while the computer plays
audio either.  If all you want to do is play some sound files, get a
cheap mp3 player and stick it on your belt clip.

I find that most badly written software is written by people who are
simply ignorant of what is available, and are unwilling to take the time
to learn how to do it right.  So, they stick with what they know, and
the end result usually works well for them, and anyone else stuck using
it puts up with the quirks.

Please.  Don't fall into this trap.  Learn the right way to do it.  Its
pretty obvious that you haven't thought this through.