Message-Id:	<199701231638.RAA10468@mail.matav.hu>
From:	"David Beck" <beck AT mail DOT matav DOT hu>
To:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Cc:	<djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: DJGPP 32-bit question
Date:	Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:38:45 +0100
MIME-Version:	1.0

> > ( Anyway, why do we protect the memory if there is
> >   only one process ? ;).
> 
> Who says so?  What about all the TSRs and device drivers that are sitting 
> in memory and doing their things behind the scenes? or Emacs from which I 
> just spawned a compiler to run? or DOS itself? or a memory-mapped storage 
> device?  Do we want their memory to be overwritten by a program who went 
> amok?

Yes, that's true. Since mostly I program in REAL multitask OS ( WinNT ;(
and Linux :) the word multitask/multithread has different meaning for
me, not programs hooked to the interrrupts. That's why I didn't count on
the TSRs. 

> 
> > My question is that, is it possible to make a DOS 
> > extender ( or modify some existing ), to support
> > multithreading or I missed something ?
> 
> The FAQ points you to such a package in section 22.2.  Another package 
> (LWP) was announced today on this news group.

I checked the LWP. What is a nice solution in a world like DOS. 

Since I am not a DOS expert, I don't know that under DOS , isn't it
possible to make a run-time system, say extender, that support
multiple threads ( with the same data segment ) and multiple 
processes ( with different data segment ) ? 

( The multi-thread/-process means for me also to support priorities. ).

If not possible, which limitation of DOS or whatever caused it ?


David.

- Raw text -