Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac:14222 comp.windows.misc:351
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!mtune!mtgzz!drutx!clive
From: clive@drutx.ATT.COM (Clive Steward)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.windows.misc
Subject: Re: A/UX window systems, Mac tool...( Hum Interface)
Message-ID: <6986@drutx.ATT.COM>
Date: 17 Mar 88 22:53:22 GMT
References: <1174@cpocd2.UUCP>
Organization: resident visitor
Lines: 25

From article <1174@cpocd2.UUCP>, by howard@cpocd2.UUCP (Howard A. Landman):
> You can see the problem but still don't admit it's there?  In real multitasking
> NO SPECIAL CODING IS NEEDED.  Most programs multitask AUTOMATICALLY without any
> special attention from the programmer.


Howard.

In any Mac program, GetNextEvent () _is_always_called at the appropriate
interval.  Since the beginning of Mac history, and presumably forevermore.

In your own words, "NO SPECIAL CODING IS NEEDED.  Most programs multitask 
AUTOMATICALLY without any...".

The sole exceptions are non-user programs which take over the machine, such as
memory testers or other diagnostic tools.  Same for any Unix box.

The other call, WaitNextEvent (), is simply available to allow a process
to give up more than its 'fair share' of opportunities to run.

The people who designed this did their homework ever so much more
carefully than many who criticize them have guessed.


Clive Steward