🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.sys.mac
Article #26533

Multifinder - why I *don't* want real multitasking?

#26533
From: Nick Rothwell
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1988 12:33
41 lines
2845 bytes
From article <3268@zeus.TEK.COM>, by bobr@zeus.TEK.COM (Robert Reed):
> This is the crux of the issue.  In your narrowed view of multitasking, IPC
> requirements may exclude such systems as Multifinder.  Yet, Multifinder fits
> broader views of multitasking which rely only on the ability to share
> resources among a set of simultaneously executing processes.  

Consider this a general posting rather than a response to Robert's
comments in particular...
   Is the following a reason to prefer Multifinder's event-driven
multitasking to "real" timesliced multitasking?
   If I'm running some sort of package which does real-time things,
like timing events, and doing things at certain times, I presumably
don't want the OS occasionally kicking in to attempt a re-scheduling,
even if nothing else is runnable. At least with Multifinder's
approach, if my time-critical application has the machine, it keeps it
until it's finished.
   In fact, timing things on input is probably OK as long as you have
kernel routines to timestamp stuff. But output still seems like a
problem.
   The application which came to mind this morning: MIDI sequencing
software. If my sequencer is going flat out, I'm playing into it from
my keyboard, and it has to get notes and so on out to the noise boxes
within milliseconds. When it's stopped (and awaiting mouse input),
then I can "swap" it out and look at something else, but when it's
going, I don't want anything else to trip it up.
   Here's a technical question, out of curiosity - I presume the
MacOs's GetNextEvent (or whatever) is a "let me sleep until mouse or
window or keyboard event" kind of call. So: how does one extend the
set of required events (for example: let me sleep until mouse or
window or keyboard or character at the modem port)? Is the set of
event types infinitely extensible? Or are there only ever going to be
a fixed number?

> Robert Reed, Tektronix CAE Systems Division, bobr@zeus.TEK
-- 
Nick Rothwell,	Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh.
		nick%lfcs.ed.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk
		<Atlantic Ocean>!mcvax!ukc!lfcs!nick
~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~
...while the builders of the cages sleep with bullets, bars and stone,
they do not see your road to freedom that you build with flesh and bone.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1092@its63b.ed.ac.uk>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcvax!ukc!its63b!csnjr
References: <3268@zeus.TEK.COM>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcvax!ukc!its63b!csnjr
From: csnjr@its63b.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.windows.misc
Subject: Multifinder - why I *don't* want real multitasking?
Message-ID: <1092@its63b.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 17 Mar 88 12:33:05 GMT
References: <3268@zeus.TEK.COM>
Reply-To: nick%ed.lfcs@uk.ac.ucl.cs.nss
Organization: LFCS, University of Edinburgh
Lines: 41
Keywords: Mac, Multifinder, Multitasking
Summary: Why I don't want real multitasking