Suggestions for improvement of the emulator

[Evil]

Mike Hearn wrote:

>>From a dictionary:
>
>"em·u·late: Computer Science. To imitate the function of (another
>system), as by modifications to hardware or software that allow the
>imitating system to accept the same data, execute the same programs, and
>achieve the same results as the imitated system."
>
>Seems like a good description of Wine to me. It imitates the Win32 API.
>  
>
By this definition:

Windows XP = Windows 9x Emulator
Windows 9x = Dos Emulator
etc...

In fact, this definition makes a confusing amount of software and 
hardware an "emulator" solely by virtue of conforming to standards or 
through backwards compatibility.  There's not even an exception that 
says the "same program" has to be binary code.  So, every interpretive 
programming language, but first implementations, is an "emulator".

I refuse to use such a loose definition, probably written by an English 
major who didn't fully comprehend what he was writing, simply because he 
was paid to write it.  I don't think any of us should, unless you also 
agree that purchased software always does things more correctly than 
free software.  :)  So we need to make sure the media gets it right:

"em·u·late: Computer Science, Software: Imitation of the function of (another
system), by dynamic recompilation or interpretive translation as to allow the
imitating system to accept the same data, execute the same binary programs, and
achieve the same results as the imitated system."