Path: utzoo!lsuc!ncrcan!brambo!morgan
From: morgan@brambo.UUCP (Morgan W. Jones)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Friendly waiting (not hogging the CPU)
Message-ID: <393@brambo.UUCP>
Date: 19 Apr 88 21:13:17 GMT
References: <8804150348.AA26966@jade.berkeley.edu>
Reply-To: morgan@brambo.UUCP (Morgan W. Jones)
Organization: Bramalea Software Inc., Bramalea, Ont.
Lines: 23

In article <8804150348.AA26966@jade.berkeley.edu> SLMYQ@USU.BITNET writes:
>That would be great.  In fact, if the big compiler compainies wanted to make
>it easy, they would just add some code into the stub for Delay() to check
>the input for 0.

Sorry to keep picking on you Bryan, but the compiler companies
shouldn't add code to their stubs to check for anything.

1) It isn't portable.  The next guy tries to compile code with a
different compiler which doesn't have the checking code and gets a
Guru.  It would be almost imposible to track down.

2) It isn't upwardly compatible.  What if an option is added to a
routine that just happens to be nullified by the stub code in an old
compiler - you can't access the new functionality until you get a new
copy of the compiler (or libraries).

>                                Bryan Ford (SLMYQ@USU.BITNET)

-- 
Morgan Jones - Bramalea Software Inc.        morgan@brambo.UUCP
      ...!{uunet!mnetor!lsuc!ncrcan, utgpu!telly}!brambo!morgan
"These might not even be my opinions, let alone anyone else's."