[gclist] Re: gclist-digest V3 #84

Richard A. O'Keefe ok@atlas.otago.ac.nz
Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:27:29 +1200 (NZST)

John R Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
	Well, OK, you've just reinvented OS/360 MVT, which put all the processes in
	one address space.  It's not a terrible idea if they need to communicate and
	you can predict the amount of memory they'll need.  On the other hand, the
	fact that MVT is long dead, replaced by MVS which allocates an address space
	per process may tell us something. 
Hmm.  It tells me three things.
(1) IBM didn't think of using functional or mostly-functional languages in MVT.
(2) IBM had a habit of dropping support for their operating systems (there
    were several /360 operating systems; it made business sense for IBM to
    concentrate on just a few).
(3) Without knowing what _else_ was different between MVT and MVS, no
    conclusions can be drawn.

I thought CICS put everything in one address space.
Does it/did it?