Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!snorkelwacker!usc!samsung!uunet!ogicse!oregon!jmeissen
From: jmeissen@oregon.oacis.org (John Meissen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Problem with CreateProc & LoadSeg
Message-ID: <481@oregon.oacis.org>
Date: 7 May 90 18:41:16 GMT
References: <1677@mindlink.UUCP>
Organization: Oregon Advanced Computing Institute (OACIS), Beaverton, OR
Lines: 24

In article <1677@mindlink.UUCP> a464@mindlink.UUCP (Bruce Dawson) writes:
>> root@dialog.sub.org writes:
>> whether or not there is any cleaner way to do it. My  problem  was  to
>> start a process much like Execute(), only asynchronously. As far as  I
 [...]
>of these problems can be solved by doing a CreateProc on a short little
>assembler routine which will communicate with the main program.  The assembler

This is basically what I did when I wrote the fork() implementation for 
the Lattice compiler. Given this approach you have a lot of flexibility.
I attached an assembler stub to the LoadSeg'd code that waited for a
startup message from the parent process. This message contained the 
argument string and miscellaneous stuff I don't remember any more. In
addition, the reply port was used for returning the exit status of the
child process, making it possible to wait on it and unload it. 
That's one thing you need to remember, that LoadSeg'd code won't automatically
get UnLoaded, you have to either do it manually or attach the SegList to the
task structure so the system will do it for you.

-- 
 John Meissen ............................... Oregon Advanced Computing Institute
 jmeissen@oacis.org        (Internet) | "That's the remarkable thing about life;
 ..!sequent!oacis!jmeissen (UUCP)     |  things are never so bad that they can't
 jmeissen                  (BIX)      |  get worse." - Calvin & Hobbes