Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!think!snorkelwacker!usc!wuarchive!texbell!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: resource tracking Message-ID: <5215@sugar.hackercorp.com> Date: 27 Feb 90 14:40:53 GMT References: <355.25C92297@weyr.FIDONET.ORG> <926@tardis.Tymnet.COM> <5201@sugar.hackercorp.com> <5207@sugar.hackercorp.com> <23088@usc.edu> Reply-To: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston Lines: 24 In article <23088@usc.edu> papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) flames for a while.... Thank you very much. I'm not refusing to move anywhere. I've acknowledged that my terminology was incorrect. What I don't see is what relevence that has to what I was trying to say... which is that virtually anything you do on the Amiga involves inteprocess communication and sharing resources with other tasks. If you (the collective you) would quit being such LMIs and consider the substance of what I'm saying here perhaps we'd make some progress. I'm totally dumbfounded at the reaction that a single poorly-worded sentence has produced from what I believe to be a generally sensible bunch of folks. I hereby completely retract anything I have said that might even imply that the phrase "system call" has any relevance to the Amiga, or that message passing is the only form of interprocess communication. I retract these statements without any caveats or exceptions. Now can we get on with some productive work instead? -- _--_|\ Peter da Silva . / \ \_.--._/ I haven't lost my mind, it's backed up on tape somewhere! v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'