Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!efi!tim
From: tim@efi.com (Tim Maroney)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: Protected-mode snake oil
Message-ID: <1990Aug17.213028.5997@efi.com>
Date: 17 Aug 90 21:30:28 GMT
References: <1204.26c2fb48@waikato.ac.nz> <1990Aug14.200525.20562@efi.com> <1990Aug15.133346.18080@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Organization: Electronics For Imaging, Inc.
Lines: 17

In article <1990Aug14.200525.20562@efi.com> tim@efi.com (Tim Maroney) writes:
>>I really don't like
>>crashing my system hundreds of times during development.  It leads to
>>disk errors, it wastes a lot of time, it sometimes loses my work,
>>
>>it makes it impossible to trace many errors.

In article <1990Aug15.133346.18080@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu
(Steve Dorner) writes:
>No help here, of course.

How so?  If a system gets big random chunks of its RAM overwritten,
including debugger code, and then crashes requiring (or forcing) a
reboot, then it's pretty hard to see where the error occurred.  If
memory protection suspends the application and breaks into the pristine
debugger as soon as the bad memory write is requested, it's much easier
to see what's going on.