🚀 go-pugleaf

Deven Corzine <deven@rpi.edu> writes in
Message-ID: <DEVEN.89May30030703@daniel.rpi.edu>

> In article <8905291930.AA10122@jade.berkeley.edu> 451061@UOTTAWA.BITNET
> (Valentin Pepelea) writes:
>
> > Faster message passing, faster context switches (no need to copy
> > memory and translate addresses (MOVES instruction)), but best of
> > all, the ability of programs to access its other address space
> > directly. I for one think its really neat to have hacks such as
> > Vscreen, Dmouse, Snip-It and others which would be rather impossible
> > to implement if the single addressing space was not used.
>
> Ah, but you see...  it basically operates on the assumption that there
> is not only a single address space, but no memory protection as
> well...

Ridiculous! Memory protection merely prevents tasks from overwriting each
other. It does not prevent them from reading each other's address space. And
by declaring memory to be public, writing in each other's space is allowed too.
Read protected memory is useful only in multi-user systems.

If you have separate address spaces, then you can not read and write each
other's address space. You share data only by sending messages. That is very
icky, very Unix-like.

Valentin
_________________________________________________________________________
"An  operating  system  without         Name:   Valentin Pepelea
 virtual memory is an operating         Phonet: (613) 231-7476 (New!)
 system without virtue."                Bitnet: 451061@Uottawa.bitnet
                                        Usenet: Use cunyvm.cuny.edu gate
         - Ancient Inca Proverb         Planet: 451061@acadvm1.UOttawa.CA