Pre-emptive vs. Cooperative Multitasking
Tue, 1 Aug 1995 12:58:33 -0700 (PDT)
On Mon, 31 Jul 1995, Francois-Rene Rideau wrote:
> > Here's an elaboration: how about if all power, both computing and
> > otherwise, is passed down a hierarchy of objects? In order to recive
> > computing time an object must be attached to a power-providing object
> > (perhaps the clock, perhaps some other object attached to the clock), and
> > in order to be visible an object must be attached to a vision-providing
> > object.
> Yes, that's exactly how I think things should be implemented.
> However, at high-level, I also want migration to be possible and easy
> from some providing object to another, so this will constrain implementation
> in some way.
Right. I was thinking of a metaphor for this: plugging and unplugging a
power cord. The only problem is, who's doing the plugging ;)? Should an
object be required to have a 'patron' who'll unplug and replug it in as
needed? Should the object's class be trusted to do this, or should other
objects also be permitted to? Should ANY object be able to mess with the
> > The full quote (which wouldn't work as a motto) is "Rem non spem, factum
> > non dictum, quaerit amicus." The book translates it as "A friend seeks
> > support, not promises; action, not talk." The book, by the way, is Artes
> > Latinae, level 1, book 1, by Waldo E. Sweet (Encyclopedia Brittanica).
> Err, why wouldn't it work as a motto ? Currently, I've just added it to
> the LLL page; tell me if I'm doing wrong...
It wouldn't hurt to use it as a motto-- I just kinda liked the vagueness
of the shorter version. The long version specifies that it's a friend
that's doing the seeking.
Nonetheless, I'm glad I could help add a little atmosphere to the project!
A better historian than a computer scientist, and a better chemist that