Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:34673 comp.sys.mac:32752
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!sun-barr!texsun!texbell!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Apple System 7.0
Message-ID: <3895@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Date: 31 May 89 11:42:53 GMT
References: <3846@sugar.hackercorp.com> <4704@okstate.UUCP>
Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston
Lines: 42

[I claim that Deitel isn't such a great authority on operating systems
because one of his main examples is CP/M]

In article <4704@okstate.UUCP>, norman@a.cs.okstate.edu (Norman Graham) writes:
> That's a pretty cheap shot at Deital's book Peter.

I don't know about that. I couldn't see any constructive reason for
including CP/M. If Deitel considers CP/M sufficiently interesting as
an operating system to include it is one of his 6 major examples, his
definition of an operating system leaves something to be desired. CP/M
is little more than a program loader.

Since that's precisely what you're using his book as a source for, I
think it's entirely relevant to this discussion.

[I make a typo, and bring up Comer's XINU book ]

In article <4704@okstate.UUCP>, norman@a.cs.okstate.edu (Norman Graham) writes:
> BTW, Comer's book is on XINU... not Xenix.

You're right. I hate it when my brain gets ahead of my fingers and I make a
fool of myself. Still, the description of what a modern operating system
is composed of in the preface (memory manager, scheduler, file system, etc...)
is one of the most concise descriptions I've run across.

[I suggest transparent multitasking as a better term than 'real' multitasking]

In article <4704@okstate.UUCP>, norman@a.cs.okstate.edu (Norman Graham) writes:
> No No No! A better term is the one used for the past 15 or 20 years...
> 'Multitasking with Preemptive Task Scheduling' or 'Preemptive Multitasking'.

Since pre-emptive multitasking is not necessary for transparency (see, as
a counter example, the Polyforth development system of the mid-70s) I don't
think that's a better term.

> Transparent multitasking is still ambiguous: Is it transparent to the 
> programmer, program, or user?

Yes. Yes. Yes.
-- 
Peter "Have you hugged your wolf today" da Silva      `-_-'
...texbell!sugar!peter, or peter@sugar.hackercorp.com  'U`