Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!uwvax!rang
From: rang@cs.wisc.edu (Anton Rang)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: How to Argue Technical Points (now documenting tail patches)
Summary: The list of patched traps changes with time
Message-ID: <RANG.89Dec1112139@derby.cs.wisc.edu>
Date: 1 Dec 89 17:21:39 GMT
References: <2744@dogie.macc.wisc.edu>
Sender: news@spool.cs.wisc.edu
Organization: UW-Madison CS department
Lines: 19
In-reply-to: yahnke@vms.macc.wisc.edu's message of 30 Nov 89 17:43:51 GMT

In article <2744@dogie.macc.wisc.edu> yahnke@vms.macc.wisc.edu
  (Ross Yahnke, MACC) writes:
>Apple documents all traps that may move memory [ ... ]
>Would it make any sense or be any help if Apple were to do a similar
>list [of traps which cannot be tail-patched]?

  Seems to me that this list would change too often to be useful.
Apple's patches are basically bug-fixes; if somebody finds a new bug,
the easiest way to fix it may involve checking a trap which was
previously safe to patch.

  I like the idea of a Tech Note documenting bugs fixed in various
system releases, though....

		Anton
   
+---------------------------+------------------+-------------+
| Anton Rang (grad student) | rang@cs.wisc.edu | UW--Madison |
+---------------------------+------------------+-------------+