Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!cbmvax!andy
From: andy@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (Andy Finkel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: 1.2 resident query
Message-ID: <1005@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 18-Nov-86 16:29:15 EST
Article-I.D.: cbmvax.1005
Posted: Tue Nov 18 16:29:15 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 18-Nov-86 21:57:45 EST
References: <1017@husc2.UUCP> <1607@amiga.amiga.UUCP> <760@ulowell.UUCP>
Reply-To: andy@skipper.UUCP (andy finkel)
Organization: Commodore Business Machines, 1200 Wilson Drive, West Chester, PA 19380
Lines: 71

In article <760@ulowell.UUCP> page@ulowell.UUCP (Bob Page) writes:
>andy@skipper.UUCP (andy finkel) wrote in article <1607@amiga.amiga.UUCP>:
>>The resident command allowed a reentrant, sharable program to use kept
>                         ^^^^ note the tense here
Right...read on and find out why I used the past tense here...
>>in memory, and not reloaded for multiple invocations.  Unfortunately,
>>as it turns out, this seemed only to apply to many BCPL programs.
>
>It didn't even work correctly for BCPL programs!  Sure, it worked
>somewhat, but the Resident command allocated more space than it
>should have - including a data segment that should be allocated on
>startup, not when the program was installed as resident.

Are you positive about this ? It seems like if it was done that
way we'd have to have a resident and non-resident version of each
BCPL program.

>
>>And there was no way to check whether a program was residentable or not
>		This is a truly great word, Andy.	^^^^^^^^^
>
Hmmm, should it be spelled residentible ?  It was a just shorter way of saying
'able to be properly made resident' (But I bet you figured that out. :-) )

>>Some more thought is going to have to be put into the concept
>>before it sees the light of day again.
>
>Even a _little_ more thought would have been nice ... like checksumming
>the segments to see if they had changed - if so, allocate space for
>new ones - in other words, take what you can and replace the dirty
>segments from the disk.  I'm not flaming you guys, I'm flaming MCC.
>
Right.  It was designed for BCPL programs, we put it into the
developer releases, it won't appear again until it works more generally.

BTW, checksumming segments sounds like a poor idea...it defeats the
purpose of the shareable requirement...that 2 or more processes can share
the same copy of a program.  Were you envisioning global variables ? 

>Hey, speaking of the Toolkit (well, you did but I trimmed out that part),
>what can you say about the program to allow overscanning?  It's mentioned
>in the 1.2 release notes (poof) but the gamma 1 toolkit doesn't have it
>and the 1.2 release toolkit isn't out yet.
>

I'm going to let Dale handle this one.  Dale ?

>>			andy finkel
>>			Commodore(Amiga)
>
>Are you still in Los Gatos or have you returned to West Chester?
I'm in West Chester for now.
>
>..Bob
>-- 
>Bob Page,  U of Lowell CS Dept.      ulowell!page,  page@ulowell.CSNET


					andy finkel
-- 

			andy finkel
			Commodore/Amiga
			{ihnp4|seismo|allegra}!cbmvax!andy
		or	 pyramid!amiga!andy

Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share.

I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.

"Never make anything simple and efficient when it can be complex and wonderful."