🚀 go-pugleaf

In <mortenk.65.720660018@dhhalden.no> mortenk@dhhalden.no (MORTEN KNUDSEN) writes:

>In article <etxansk.720194534@garbod20> etxansk@garbo.ericsson.se writes:
>>From: etxansk@garbo.ericsson.se
>>Subject: Windows Multitasking
>>Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 14:02:14 GMT
>>
>> One simple question: By reading a chapter in Charles Petzold's
>>"Programming Windows" I got the impression that Windows programs
>>have to divide time-consuming tasks into a number of sub-tasks
>>in order to let other Windows programs get some execution time.
>>
>> Is this true? Does the sharing of system time depend on all
>>processes running? In that case, isn't it annoying to write
>>compilers etc for Windows? 
>> 
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Anders Skelander
>>

>I think discribing windows as multitasking is an overstatement. It's more 
>like reentrant. If you have tried OS/2, you'll know what I mean.

I really wish people wouldn't write things when they don't know what
they're talking about.

Please define the following words:  'multitasking', 'reentrant'.
Describe the different types of multitasking and their advantages and
disadvantages. 

[Once you have answered the preceding questions, please explain why
the statement above concerning Windows, OS/2, multitasking, and
reentrant is silly.]

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.