Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!gatech!seismo!mcvax!boring!jack
From: jack@boring.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Re-entrancy Re-visited
Message-ID: <6812@boring.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 6-Mar-86 20:24:51 EST
Article-I.D.: boring.6812
Posted: Thu Mar  6 20:24:51 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Mar-86 08:37:08 EST
References: <34200005@orstcs.UUCP>
Reply-To: jack@mcvax.UUCP (Jack Jansen)
Organization: AMOEBA project, CWI, Amsterdam
Lines: 18
Apparently-To: rnews@mcvax

The fact the functions returning structures are non-reentrant
is not the only problem.

*any* intelligent I/O subsystem will have to keep some sort
of internal data structures, and an interrupt routine will
immedeately blow the program away as soon as it tries to do
I/O. Or, even worse, it will blow the program away two years
later, when you've long gone somewhere else.
The only safe things to do in an interrupt routine are
- setting the InterruptHasOccurred flag,
- longjmp
- exit.

By the way, can anyone point me to an application where I would
want to calculate with complex numbers in an *interrupt routine*:-)
-- 
	Jack Jansen, jack@mcvax.UUCP
	The shell is my oyster.