From: Mark Biggar <mark.a.biggar@attbi.com>
Subject: Re: Multitasking theory question
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 05:43:39 GMT
Date: 2002-06-24T05:43:39+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D16B14B.2A5D8261@attbi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: PawR8.3$zt.566@news.xtra.co.nz
AG wrote:
>
> "Ted Dennison" <dennison@telepath.com> wrote in message
> news:3D128BA9.8090707@telepath.com...
> > Kai Schuelke wrote:
>
> > How tasks are implemented is up to the compiler.
> <<...>>
> > DOS has no process support of any kind, Win32 supports threads.
>
> What does it have to do with DOS or any OS for that matter?
> Surely, a run-time system can implement whatever scheduling
> it wants to (within hardware capabilities that is). After all, what
> is an OS but a glorified run-time system...
The OS can greatly effect how things work. For example if your
run-time system implements its own threads inside a OS process
then things like the OS blocking the process on IO and other
services can interfere with the run-times internal threading.
--
Mark Biggar
mark.a.biggar@attbi.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-24 5:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-20 20:46 Multitasking theory question Kai Schuelke
2002-06-20 20:53 ` Stephen Leake
2002-06-21 2:13 ` Ted Dennison
2002-06-24 3:18 ` AG
2002-06-24 4:13 ` tmoran
2002-06-24 4:24 ` AG
2002-06-24 7:33 ` Dale Stanbrough
2002-06-25 3:27 ` AG
2002-06-25 4:48 ` tmoran
2002-06-25 5:00 ` AG
2002-06-25 5:17 ` Darren New
2002-06-25 5:25 ` AG
2002-06-24 5:43 ` Mark Biggar [this message]
2002-06-24 6:48 ` AG
2002-06-24 15:14 ` Darren New
2002-06-24 16:19 ` Larry Kilgallen
2002-06-25 2:01 ` AG
2002-06-25 3:21 ` Darren New
2002-06-25 4:01 ` AG
2002-06-25 4:19 ` Darren New
2002-06-25 4:51 ` AG
2002-06-26 1:58 ` Darren New
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox