Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!udel!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!o.gp.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!rg20+ From: rg20+@andrew.cmu.edu (Rick Francis Golembiewski) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: Help --> How to prevent the visit from the dreaded guru Message-ID: Date: 5 Jan 91 00:35:24 GMT References: <611@caslon.cs.arizona.edu>, <1991Jan4.203339.8800@maytag.waterloo.edu> Organization: Class of '92, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA Lines: 27 In-Reply-To: <1991Jan4.203339.8800@maytag.waterloo.edu> himacdon@maytag.uwaterloo.ca (Hamish Macdonald) writes: >In addition, putting memory protection into AmigaDos is not as easy as >you imply. It will break the vast majority of existing Amiga >programs. All interprocess communication in the Amiga is done using >shared memory techniques. Guidelines for writing programs in a manner >upwardly compatible with future memory protection mechanisms have not >existed for a long time, and have not been religiously followed in any >case. One Think that I have alaways wondered: is is practical implement memory protection from one task? Ie can the MMU be used to insure that task X doesn't stomp on any memory that it has not allocated? This ability would be extreemly useful for developement (even if it required linking in special code to do resource tacking so that the task could be shut down). After all it's VERY annonying to have to reboot all the time while testing a program as apposed to getting a segmentation fault message. While this is certainly NOT an answer to stopping guru visits under normal amigaDOS operation, it would be very helpful for debugging. Anyone care to comment on the practicality of this idea? // Rick Golembiewski rg20+@andrew.cmu.edu \\ \\ #include stddisclaimer.h // \\ "I never respected a man who could spell" // \\ -M. Twain //