Pre-emptive vs. Cooperative Multitasking

[Billy Tanksley]

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 
power supply?

> > 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!

-Billy
A better historian than a computer scientist, and a better chemist that 
either.