|[News] Olaf Barthel Interview||ANN.lu|
|Posted on 10-Jun-2002 09:11 GMT by Rodney McDonell||56 comments|
Finaly i have finished my interview with Olaf Barthel. At near 6000 words, its not a bad read, and probably one of my best interviews yet. Get to know a great man, read it now!
|List of all comments to this article|
|Olaf Barthel Interview : Comment 33 of 56||ANN.lu|
|Posted by kjetil on 11-Jun-2002 05:48 GMT|
|In reply to Comment 30 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):|
About that Icon database system he is talking about, I was thinking about the Icon system of Windows31 when he was talking about this, Icons shoed be able to copied with the program, how ever there is an Icon database in workbench is called the def icons. There is an “.info” file they contains the position of icons when put on the desktop, The one thing that is missing is snapping files with out an icon to an fixed point in the window. So you not need to snap icons every time you open an window.
Cache up icons in memory just take up ram, you gain speed , putting the cache on disk will make the load time equally long, translating plainer to chunky and chasing it up may increases speed how ever, putting the cache in large swap file can increase speed, by not having to deal with file system, filename table.
I have an idea:
How about small swap files for every directory, every icon has it’s own checksum number right when info files are copied in to the directory the planer data is garbed from the file translated to chunky and stored in the swap file, the chksum number make shore that the icons is not stored twice in the swapfile, this should all be handled by the system it self not the workbench to make shore that the filesystem looks the same, there is the otter possibility is to rewrite every AmigaDos command to support this cache system or handled by the workbench in an Application way. This requires that chace is compered with icons in the directories this make it slower or at least, it’s need to be refreshed manually or by interval, or if the filesystem report changes to the directory to the workbench can be an option, having an system based on reporting by an otter system requires that the workbech can differ between the changes made by an otter program and by it self, or else the system may hang in refresh loops.
About the pull down menus, there is an replacement for this, you can se them in OS4.0 preview pictures,
|List of all comments to this article (continued)||