🚀 go-pugleaf

In his stupidest posting this month, aka article
<446ofvINN97n@keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca>, c2a192@ugrad.cs.ubc.ca (Kazimir
Kylheku) wrote:

> I wonder how many Mac programs assume that the system is cooperative, and
> don't bother locking handles when they "know" that they will have the CPU.

No wonder you are having such a hard time grasping the concept of
handles.  Yes, it would be very painful if we had to lock down a handle
each and every time we wanted to dereference it.  No, Kazimir, we don't
have to do that.  The only time we have to lock them down is if we make
certain system calls that may move memory in our heap and we don't want
our object to move (usually because we have some other alias to the data
structure somewhere).  Every application on a Macintosh runs in its own
heap, so a different application moving it's data won't affect other
applications.  This has very little to do with assuming the system is
cooperative.  You are wrong again, Kazimir.

Since, as usual, you just don't seem to get it, CMT means that we can
query the state of the world outside of our application (open windows,
running apps, etc.), and know that that state won't change until we let
it.  That is far, far different than the internal state of our
application.

> Hopefully, they will get to run in separate address spaces in Copeland! :)

Yes.

> The heap management, in its current form, couldn't function under pre-emption.

Again, you are flaunting your ignorance.  Every app has its own heap; this
kind of compaction works just fine, irregardless of the type of
multitasking.
-- 
        Nevin ":-)" Liber       nevin@CS.Arizona.EDU    (520) 293-2799