home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: cs.ruu.nl!usenet
- From: wsldanke@cs.ruu.nl (Wessel Dankers)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
- Subject: Re: FindTask() VERY IMPORTANT
- Date: 09 Mar 96 00:38:01 +0100
- Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
- Message-ID: <1166.6642T38T97@cs.ruu.nl>
- References: <4hfvff$sj6@werple.net.au> <192.6637T931T2098@academy.bastad.se>?20@
- <4hm7qm$otm@news.uni-paderborn.de><4hmpfb$5pi@news.xs4all.nl> <MlDlTdS00iWS45Xc5x@andrew.cmu.edu>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: anx1p16.cc.ruu.nl
- X-Newsreader: THOR 2.22 (Amiga TCP/IP)
-
- Berend Ozceri <bo24+@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
- > Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.amiga.programmer: 7-Mar-96 Re: FindTask()
- > VERY IMPORTANT by Marco Nelissen@xs1.xs4al
- >> Ralph Schmidt (laire@basis.owl.de) wrote:
- >> : Never ever use SysBase->ThisTask for your programs. It will be
- >> : banned/forbidden in the next OS release.
- >>
- >> Says who? Why would a future OS not use this field?
-
- > Any changes in the Exec micro-kernel, especially in the scheduler,
- > especially leaning towards multiprocessor support would make that field
- > obsolete.
-
- You are already more right than you think! I have a program that shows
- "exec.library" as the name with ThisTask, but "MyProgram" with FindTask(0)!
-
- a) ((struct ExecBase *)4)->ThisTask->tc_Node.ln_Name
-
- b) FindTask(0)->tc_Node.ln_Name
-
- --
- Wessel Dankers _\\|//_ <wsldanke@cs.ruu.nl>
- ///|\\\
- ----------------------------oOO--(_)---OOo----------------------------
- `Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear
- to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than
- what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise.'
-
-