🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <fyock-2308950935260001@144.212.1.78>,
Lee Fyock <fyock@mathworks.com> wrote:
 >In article <41d4a5INNgj0@keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca>, c2a192@ugrad.cs.ubc.ca
 >(Kazimir Kylheku) wrote:
 >
 >> Multitasking means that you at least
 >> simulate concurrency using time slicing.
 >
 >Yes, but how you time-slice depends on the implementation of "multitasking".


And if you don't time-slice you don't have multitasking. You can call it
"cooperative" to save face, and provide your MacOS or Win 3.x userbase
with a buzzword.

 >> It means that other tasks are
 >> truly running whether or not my program yields.
 >
 >That's "pre-emptive" "multitasking".

Only kind there is.

 >> It means that I
 >> can send signals and messages to that program from another program.
 >
 >No, that's "inter-process communication", which has little or nothing to
 >do with multitasking.

It has everything to do with multi-tasking. You can't send a message
or signal to a process that is hogging the CPU. You can't have
any sort of asynchronous notification of incoming messages.

 >> Coroutines should be excluded from the definition of multitasking proper.
 >
 >In your humble opinion.
 >
 >"True" multitasking is (pick one):
 >a)  one task per CPU
 >b)  pre-emptive/no yields/done by the OS
 >c)  cooperative/yields/time given by each application
 >d)  when the user can use two or more programs/applications at the same time
 >e)  any of the above

I pick b
-- 
Finger c2a192@keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca for PGP public key. Or contact
one of the public key servers -- the key id is 0xD3C7995D.