🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <nevin-0602962253080001@150.135.1.79>, nevin@CS.Arizona.EDU (Nevin ":-]" Liber) writes:
:In article <kevinbDMCMIy.B26@netcom.com>, kevin@frobozz.sccsi.com (Kevin
:Brown) wrote:
:
:> Fine.  Then try running a "brain-dead" program like this instead:
:
:>         main()
:>         {
:>             while ( there_is_useful_work_to_be_done )
:>             {
:>                 do_the_computationally_intensive_useful_work();
:>             }
:>             display_the_results();
:>         }
:
:> where there_is_useful_work_to_be_done remains true for long periods of
:> time (minutes, hours, perhaps even days).
:
:So, you can't figure out how to get this to work well on a Mac, eh? 
:Hmmmm...  <in deep thought for 4.2 seconds>  How about putting a
:WaitNextEvent() call in one of the inner loops of
:do_the_computationally_intensive_useful_work();?

so what MacOS programming is all about is to move the PMT task control
out of the OS in put it into YOUR source code? 
What about all that speed gain a CMT OS would bring that PMT looses?
Is it spent on the WaitNextEvent() function call ? Is that
the reason why the Mac behaves so slow? Because every single program
is constantly checking if it should leave control to all the other.
Thus, running the "taskscheduler" 10,100,1000,.. times more than
a PMT system would? Face it, it is ugly, and forces the programmer
to deal with things that he shouldn't have to care about.
It also makes programs less portable, since you will have to put
system calls into every little loop. Thus, it is also a limiting
the software reuse, and making applications more complex and
thus, more expensive. Is there no computer science rule MacOS 
don't break?

/Henrik