Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.programmer:6241 comp.sys.mac:31823
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!hoptoad!tim
From: tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer,comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: System 7.0 Q & A
Message-ID: <7266@hoptoad.uucp>
Date: 12 May 89 20:26:34 GMT
References: <30353@apple.Apple.COM> <4666@okstate.UUCP> <1787@internal.Apple.COM>
Reply-To: tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney)
Organization: Eclectic Software, San Francisco
Lines: 28

In article <1787@internal.Apple.COM> lsr@Apple.COM (Larry Rosenstein) writes:
>>    Will the virtual memory scheme offer memory protection for
>>    multiple processes running under multifinder, or do all
>
>All processes share the same address space.  This question was asked at 
>the Developer's Conference, and the reply said that offering protection 
>between application heaps would be only part of the job, since low memory 
>and the system heap is still shared between all applications.  

That's true.  Unfortunately, it seems to indicate that memory
protection in System 7.0 will still leave developers in the highly
unfortunate position of being able to crash the system with application
software bugs.  The probability will be reduced but not eliminated, if
I'm reading you correctly, Larry.  Since low-memory globals are not
being eliminated and the system heap is not being made read-only to
applications, then one program can still crash either the OS software
or other applications.  Double plus ungood.  I'd prefer that Apple just
go ahead and break the programs that ignore the guidelines on low
memory and the system heap, rather than leave us all floundering about
having to reboot the system constantly during early development.

Oh well, I thought I was going to have to wait for 8.0 for this anyway....
-- 
Tim Maroney, Consultant, Eclectic Software, sun!hoptoad!tim
"What's the ugliest part of your body?
 Some say your nose, some say your toes,
 But I think it's your mind."
-- Frank Zappa