0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
"Hack" as in "void the warranty"? I have nothing against these two programming languages, and many of the games so far wouldn't be possible without Ndless, but I'm just fine with Lua.
Quote from: Ashbad on June 05, 2011, 07:07:51 pm...C has full access over lower level parts of the OS and the hardware itself...Technical Correction: C has partial access to the lower level parts of the OS and the hardware itself. Some things just can't be done without dipping into inline ASM. C does a heck of the lot, though, to be fair.
...C has full access over lower level parts of the OS and the hardware itself...
Quote from: Qwerty.55 on June 05, 2011, 08:19:56 pmQuote from: Ashbad on June 05, 2011, 07:07:51 pm...C has full access over lower level parts of the OS and the hardware itself...Technical Correction: C has partial access to the lower level parts of the OS and the hardware itself. Some things just can't be done without dipping into inline ASM. C does a heck of the lot, though, to be fair.Just to go farther there are some things you can't do in asm either. Take windows for example, you can't get full control of the cpu due to the way the virtual memory is organized. In fact only Windows itself is allowed to view the physical memory. For some things you have to rely on the OS to do some things, which can be both good and bad. In some cases syscalls are very well written plus it prevents programs from corrupting the system. But as we know with TI many syscalls are very poorly written, but we are forced to use them.
Wasn't there that issue though on the 83+ when it came to flash. Can't certain functions only be done from page 0 in flash which the OS controls. I think one of them was unlocking the flash.
Which would be a real reason to hate unofficial 3rd party ones. It's much less secure.
But, you could accidentally brick your own hardware through a small corruption in your code. That corruption could be as bad as intentionally malicious code, or even worse.And I forgot to put "for TI" after reason.
Didn't someone find a way to alter boot1 thru ndless on here? Let me look up the thread...