Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!udel!sbcs!svarsha
From: svarsha@ic.sunysb.edu (The MAD Programmer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Programming differences between 2.0 and 1.3
Message-ID: <8790@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Date: 8 May 90 18:03:09 GMT
References: <8aDCJNG00WB7Q_wUMI@andrew.cmu.edu> <11417@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Sender: news@sbcs.sunysb.edu
Organization: Society for Prevention of Amiga Madness (SPAM)
Lines: 30

In article <11417@cbmvax.commodore.com> mks@cbmvax (Michael Sinz - CATS) writes:
>Ok, so not so much "NO PROBLEM"  Well, the real answer is that you should
>program by the rules and not empirically.  That is, don't just try things
>and if they work think that they are right.  Design things while looking at

This brings to mind a question that I'm suprised that none of the hackers here
have asked already: Does 2.0 support a kosher way to start a CLI process by
an existing CLI application (or even WB) such that:

1) New process has a full CLI environment.
2) Parent can specify Input() and Output() of new process
3) When new process exits, its CLI quits too without reading from Input().
4) And the new process will receive CTRL-C/CTRL-D/... signals from the parent's
   console.

1.3's Execute() is a kludge - it does #1 real well but no matter what I do 2, 3,
or 4 gets screwed up. I can usually work around it by using hacks that I have no
prayer of working in 2.0, what a bummer. (Can you say 'mucking around with
struct FileHandle'?  ...I knew you could). Hey, like u said, my code works,
work well, but can't wait to see how miserably it fails in 2.0. I don't like
doing that, mind you, but if there's a kosher way of doing this in 1.3, I'd
like to know.

P.S. Great job on the 3000, dudes.
P.P.S. This is not a flame about 1.3 or anything.

--
Rock Lobster.
Honorary member of the Obfuscation Programmers' Society of America.
(Membership: 1).