Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!convex!ewright
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: A use for protected mode after all
Message-ID: <109547@convex.convex.com>
Date: 29 Nov 90 23:35:37 GMT
References: <2371.27539d74@waikato.ac.nz> <1990Nov28.000542.21632@verity.com> <1990Nov28.031713.14035@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu> <2382.2754d79e@waikato.ac.nz> <1990Nov29.025924.7662@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu>
Sender: news@convex.com
Organization: Convex Computer Corporation; Richardson, TX
Lines: 30

In article <1990Nov29.025924.7662@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu> jxf@castor.cis.ksu.edu (Jerry Frain) writes:

>Yes!  All applications, your precious debugger included, should not be
>able modify the memory space of *other* programs.  You will note that
>this should not encompass the development-time debugging involved in
>creating programs (but, I am unfamiliar with the way that Mac debuggers
>are implemented).

??  I am not sure what you mean by this.  One of the common functions
of a debugger is to modify the value of variables in a program being
debugged.  And what is the difference between development-time debugging
and ????-time debugging (whatever you are contrasting it to)?


>Simple, basic, controls for protecting system integrity.  That's not too
>much to ask now, is it?  IBM will soon make OS/2 their standard.

I'm not sure what to make of this, either.  Maybe IBM will make OS/2
(half an operating system :-) *its* standard, but OS/2 has been a
complete disaster in terms of user acceptance.  The only real enthusiasm
in the PC World these days is for Microsoft Windows 3. 


>Preemptive multitasking, memory protection, etc.  With the advent of
>window systems that rival the Finder, coupled with the power of a
>command shell, Apple will be left out in the cold if it does not pick
>up on these very important concepts, soon.

Huh?  Since when is the Finder a "windowing system?"  It's just an
application that launches other applications.