Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!uhnix1!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Task KILL for Amiga
Message-ID: <3368@sugar.uu.net>
Date: 30 Jan 89 01:01:20 GMT
References: <3716@crash.cts.com> <10908@s.ms.uky.edu> <5713@cbmvax.UUCP> <620@palladium.UUCP>
Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston, TX
Lines: 22

In article <620@palladium.UUCP>, nw@palladium.UUCP (Neil Webber) writes:
> What I'm really getting at is that you have to consider the entire
> system when assessing the tradeoffs for and against a given feature.

> I do, however, cringe whenever I see someone claim that the current
> system is desirable because it is faster and more memory efficient.

Agreed, but before people misunderstand you, it is not possible to add
resource tracking to the system. Example:

	Task A allocates a bitmap.
	Task A passes the bitmap to task B.
	Task B opens a screen with the bitmap as its CustomBitmap.
	Task A exits.

At this point, if you track resources, the system gurus. Task A will have to
call "ReleaseOwnership(bitmap)", and task B will have to call "AssumeOwnership
(bitmap)". These calls are not in any current applications (for the simple
reason that they do not exist). QED.
-- 
Peter "Have you hugged your wolf today" da Silva  `-_-'  Hackercorp.
...texbell!sugar!peter, or peter@sugar.uu.net      'U`