Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!corton!imag!gourdol
From: gourdol@imag.imag.fr (Gourdol Arnaud)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Windows vs. MAC - programming reasons
Message-ID: <20070@imag.imag.fr>
Date: 4 Apr 91 22:07:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: imag.20070
References: <ROBERTK.91Apr1171818@lotatg.lotus.com> <19990@imag.imag.fr> <1991Apr3.194824.16965@sunee.waterloo.edu>
Organization: IMAG Institute, University of Grenoble, France
Lines: 51

In article <1991Apr3.194824.16965@sunee.waterloo.edu> gpsteffl@sunee.waterloo.edu (Glenn Steffler) writes:
>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
>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.

Wait a minute. On the Mac, handles are not "in some fixed area". They
area allocated dynamically for each process. You can have as many
handles as you want in each hep. The only reason you are advised
to call MoreMaster at the beginning of your programm is to avoid
heap fragmentation (having non relocatable blocks in the middle
of your heap). But if you don't, it works anyway!

The main difference I see with the Windows and Mac memory models
are:
- Windows share its memory pool with all the running processes.
  The Mac allocates a fixed size zone to each application.
  However, applications can request memory in a common pool 
  (with MultiFinder or System 7).
- Windows manage its handles with some kind of table, which
  does that thre is an upper limit on the number of handles
  you can allocate.
  The Mac gives application as many handles as they request, 
  as they are allocated dynamically.

I think I'd like to have the best of both worlds:
 - Common memory pool (altough this may lead to problems with
   unsafe applications).
 - Dynamically allocated handles.


>Fully direct manipulatable resource creation applications.  Dialog
>boxes are just a few mouse strokes away.  The dialog procedures which
>handle most of the complexity needed for drop down combo boxes,
>list boxes, radio buttons and other controls are included as default
>handler functions provided by the Windows ui.

Yeah. Sure, that's what I'd like to have with the Dialog Manager.


Arno.

-- 
   /======================//==========================================/
  / Arnaud Gourdol.      // On the Netland:         Gourdol@imag.fr  /
 /                      // Via AppleLink: Gourdol@imag.fr@INTERNET# /
/======================//==========================================/