From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7d2c8b4487ef2145 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Ada versus Java - Tasking Date: 1997/01/20 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 211129996 sender: news@organon.com (news) references: <01bc03ee$594dc520$829d6482@joy.ericsson.se> organization: Organon Motives, Inc. newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-01-20T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <1997Jan19.122511.1@eisner> kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) writes: > Operating system developers have a much better chance to make the > scheduling interact with the hardware properly, so I think the better > choices are: > > 1) Rely on OS threading support, and wait for improvements. > > 2) Lobby the operating system provider for better support, > using all methods available, including examples of other > operating systems which do it better, either on the same > hardware or some other hardware. Abosolutely. If you happen to need something better than this you probably should not be using typical run of the mill OSs in the first place. /Jon -- Jon Anthony Organon Motives, Inc. Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 jsa@organon.com