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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,f6ee8ca03c176d76 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-08-29 09:35:35 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news.stealth.net!news.stealth.net!newsfeed.news2me.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!harp.news.atl.earthlink.net!not-for-mail From: Dennis Lee Bieber Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: stupid question: how can I finish a program? Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 09:35:12 -0700 Organization: >> Perplexing Penguins Perpetually << Message-ID: References: <3D6D00B9.60EECCFB@san.rr.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: a5.f7.d0.86 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Server-Date: 29 Aug 2002 16:35:34 GMT User-Agent: KNode/0.6.1 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:28561 Date: 2002-08-29T16:35:34+00:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff fed this fish to the penguins on Wednesday 28 August 2002 03:22 pm: > Darren New writes: > >> Other OSes (like Amiga's OS) specifically don't clean up anything at >> all, as this lets you do things like allocate memory, load a program >> into it, and start it up and then exit yourself. You have to clean it >> up for yourself. > > I don't know Amiga, but it seems to me that if a crashed program > causes memory leaks, the OS is broken. > The described behavior is closer to a VMS spawn (or fork() call). Essentially the initial program has done the memory allocation/image load, after which the new process is totally independent (hence responsible for it's own process termination cleanup). One caveat, the Amiga OS did not natively handle virtual/protected memory -- it used a single global address space (it ran on 68000 processors). There were modules to make use of virtual addressing on later processors, but still no protected memory. OTOH, we are talking a system with a multi-priority round-robin preemptive task scheduler that ran off 880K floppies with a graphical (the "text" interface required the graphical libraries just to render text) interface in 256K RAM -- this, when M$ Windows was around the 3.0 (or earlier) where the window manager handled task swapping on top of a non-multitasked base. -- -- > ============================================================== < > wlfraed@ix.netcom.com | Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber KD6MOG < > wulfraed@dm.net | Bestiaria Support Staff < > ============================================================== < > Bestiaria Home Page: http://www.beastie.dm.net/ < > Home Page: http://www.dm.net/~wulfraed/ <