Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!tnc!m0154
From: m0154@tnc.UUCP (GUY GARNETT)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: Resident Applications (Was: True Multitasking)
Message-ID: <689@tnc.UUCP>
Date: 28 Jan 91 17:34:27 GMT
References: <MWM.91Jan18153532@raven.relay.pa.dec.com> <	<42149@nigel.ee.udel.edu>> <672@tnc.UUCP> <42598@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <	<678@tnc.UUCP>> <MWM.91Jan25113733@raven.pa.dec.com> <1991Jan26.075758.29203@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu>
Reply-To: m0154@tnc.UUCP (GUY GARNETT)
Organization: The Next Challenge, Fairfax, Va.
Lines: 31

In article <1991Jan26.075758.29203@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> kdarling@hobbes.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) writes:
>In <678@tnc.UUCP> m0154@tnc.UUCP (GUY GARNETT) writes:
>> Yes, I am talking about the same image in memory.  The well defined
>>  exception I am talking about is when pure code is made resident.  
  [Additional wrongheaded comments deleted]
>
>mwm@pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer) replies:
  [Other lucid comments deleted; I stand corrected]
>> If you have a program that's running a good percentage of the time, and
>>  is liable to be started a large number of times, making it resident is
>>  a good idea.
>
>Much agreement with Mike.  I'm glad he answered first <g>, because I tend
>to bristle at Amiga programmers who treat a 680x0 like a giant 6502;
>who can't handle writing reentrant code which the cpu was designed for.
>Unbelievable that a 68K user would want multiple copies of _any_ program
>code taking up extra memory.  CPU/RAM dark ages!
>
 [correct, slightly bristley comments deleted]

I don't think of the 680x0 as a giant 6502!
 
Actually, I think of it as a Z80 that died and went to heaven ...
 
;-)   ;-)   ;-)   ;-)   ;-)   ;-)   ;-)   ;-)   ;-)   ;-)   ;-)  ;-)

I guess it has something to do with where you learned to programm in
assembly, huh?  Anybody who missed the above smileys and wants to
start a flame war is hereby directed to comp.sys.amiga.advocacy.
 
Wildstar