Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pasteur!ames!amdahl!pacbell!pbhya!dbsuther
From: dbsuther@PacBell.COM (Daniel B. Suthers)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: GEMDOS Extended Argument Standard
Summary: Other considerations for new standards
Message-ID: <24965@pbhya.PacBell.COM>
Date: 29 Mar 89 18:07:37 GMT
References: <1405@atari.UUCP> <512@TSfR.UUCP>
Reply-To: dbsuther@PacBell.COM (Daniel B. Suthers)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Lines: 29

In article <512@TSfR.UUCP> orc@pell.UUCP (David L. Parsons) writes:
>In article <1405@atari.UUCP> kbad@atari.UUCP (Ken Badertscher) writes:
>>  - GEMDOS enhancements are coming that will require a robust means of
>>	passing lots of information between parent and child processes
>
>> [discussion on pascal strings & the command line tail]
>
>>  The upshot of all this is that it is* possible for a process to know
>>if the ARGV in its environment is meant for it and not left over from
>>one of its MWC/Manx/MT-C Shell spawned ancestors.  If its command line
>>length is something unreasonable, a program can take that as a clue...

I am very happy that this aspect of the OS is being standardized.  It is 
always necessary for a "working" OS to handle inter program communications.

I have but ONE favor to ask;  When the standard is created, could you please
publish not only the definition, but the Startup Code for the current (and
past) Compilers?  It is possible for MWC, Laser, Lattice, Aztec, etc to each
do their own,  but it would be much cleaner for us, the users, if we could
obtain the trivial code up-front from a reputable source (ATARI).

It would be a public relations coup if your company actually created the 
necessary code to enable any defunct compilers to continue to be useful.

My offer:  If you will provide the definition, I will provide the startup
module for Lattice C.

Daniel Suthers, Systems Analyst
UUCP: {ihnp4}!pacbell!pbnon!dbsuther