Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!ucsd!ucbvax!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!news.funet.fi!cc.tut.fi!cc.tut.fi!n67786 From: n67786@cc.tut.fi (Tero Nieminen) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc Subject: Re: Windows vs. MAC - programming reasons Message-ID: Date: 5 Apr 91 01:33:57 GMT References: <1991Mar27.061300.7636@nntp-server.caltech.edu> <19990@imag.imag.fr> <1991Apr3.194824.16965@sunee.waterloo.edu> Sender: n67786@cc.tut.fi (Tero Nieminen) Organization: Tampere Univ. of Technology, Finland. Lines: 41 In-Reply-To: gpsteffl@sunee.waterloo.edu's message of 3 Apr 91 19:48:24 GMT In article <1991Apr3.194824.16965@sunee.waterloo.edu> gpsteffl@sunee.waterloo.edu (Glenn Steffler) writes: Subject was something like: messy Dos vs Mac gimme real reasons. Background: I have been working in Windows 3.0 since September 88, and have ported a Macintosh animation editor to Windows. The Port consisted of rewriting the user interface, yet keeping the underlying structures and object manipulation code. In article <19990@imag.imag.fr> gourdol@imag.imag.fr (Gourdol Arnaud) writes: >in which way is the Memory management better on Windows. I find >the Mac model quite clean and powerful (except for this stupid story >of MultiFinder partitions maybe). Windows memory management has handles like the MAC. Fortunately tho, the handles are not in some fixed area like the Mac handle table that has to ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Hmm.. If you a referring to master pointer blocks, I really dont understand how they have to be in some fixed area like you say. Every application has it's own master pointer blocks allocated inside it's own heap, but they do not need to be initialized. The system will allocate new master pointer blocks if the program runs out of free ones, automatically. Another issue is , tho, that it may not be wize to leave it all up to the system to do. Also ahndles are not limited in number by any other means than physical memory (which currently could be a significant factor). be initialized etc. The Windows handles are handled internally by Windows, and as such, the current limitation on amounts of available system handle resources are only operating system version dependent. The next logical step is for the use of a local discriptor table for a task, which would allow a seriously large number of handles per task. Currently Windows uses a single global discriptor table for all system tasks etc. The macintosh sustem heap has a set of it's own handles and master pointer blocks, likewise. -- Tero Nieminen Tampere University of Technology n67786@cc.tut.fi Tampere, Finland, Europe