🚀 go-pugleaf

jragosta@dca.net (Joe Ragosta) wrote:

>In article <4gl353$d36@news-f.iadfw.net>, clyde@iadfw.net (Clyde Coffey) wrote:

>> wade@macc.wisc.edu (Wade E. Masshardt) wrote:
>> 
>> >In article <4gh8ma$b9p@news-f.iadfw.net>, clyde@iadfw.net (Clyde
>Coffey) wrote:
>> 
>> >>What's your point? Copland can't even completely isolate brand new
>> >>made-for-Copland apps from each other.
>> 
>> >What is your source for this?  According to the Copland Technical Overview
>> >(available from
>>
>><ftp://ftp.info.apple.com/Apple.Support.Area/Developer_Services/Technical_Documentation/Tools_Demos_&_Tech_Overviews//Copland_WWDC_Materials.sit.hqx>)
>> >Copland processes (i.e., server processes) are each in their own memory
>> >space.  How the hell do you get any more isolated than that?
>> 
>> The document you cite distinguishes between applications and server
>> processes. Copland starts a cooperative process for each application.
>> All cooperative processes share memory space.

>No. You're misreading it. Older applications which are not Copland savvy
>are cooperatively multitasked. New apps have a separate memory space and
>are shared preemptively.

If I'm misreading it -- great. But I don't see how I could be. I don't
see a thing in there about Copland-savvy apps. It says when Process
Manager lauches an application, Copland 1. Creates a new cooperative
process. etc. Maybe they miswrote it? And how does one misread this:
	Note
	In future versions of the MacOS beyond Copland, every
	application will have its own address space as well.
Direct quote from page 3-5.