🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <wilcafe-2008950222390001@callaghan.coretech.com>,
 <wilcafe@mail.coretech.com> wrote:
>I've read through a lot of this thread and noticed a lot of things that
>just are not true.

[..snip..]

  A good article.  I wish more people would follow your example.

>Myth #1 Copland will have preemptive multitasking.
>  Apple has decided to phase preemptive multitasking accross 2 major
>versions of system software. This is to ensure compatability. You will
>have to wait until Gershwin for completely preemptive multitasking, but by
>then, all the programs will be writen to take advantage of it and will be
>instantly compatible.

  Could someone in the know let me know something?  Why would 
pre-emptive multitasking break apps made for co-operative 
multitasking?  Properly done, a process doesnt "know" when 
it's been pre-empted.  Its state remains the same before and
after the task switch.
  Presumably there are MacOS-specific issues I don't know about.
Perhaps apps diddle with system data structures as they set up
a co-operative task switch, and you don't want the pre-emptive
multitasker to interrupt them in the middle of it?
  Sort of along the same lines, what would an app need to do to
take advantage of pre-emptive multitasking?  The idea is that 
the task-switcher will behave exactly the same, regardless of 
what a process does or doesn't do..  Again, I suspect there are
MacOS-specific issues I'm ignorant of.
-- 
Bill Moyer <ttk@rahul.net>