home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: doc.ic.ac.uk!not-for-mail
- From: mdf@doc.ic.ac.uk (Martin Frost)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
- Subject: Re: FindTask() VERY IMPORTANT
- Date: 11 Mar 1996 13:59:06 -0000
- Organization: Dept. of Computing, Imperial College, University of London, UK.
- Distribution: world
- Message-ID: <4i1bja$59t@oak28.doc.ic.ac.uk>
- References: <4hfvff$sj6@werple.net.au> <192.6637T931T2098@academy.bastad.se>?20@ <4hm7qm$otm@news.uni-paderborn.de> <MlDlTdS00iWS45Xc5x@andrew.cmu.edu> <4hni69$8ub@tempo.univ-lyon1.fr>
- Reply-To: mdf@doc.ic.ac.uk (Martin Frost)
- NNTP-Posting-Host: oak28.doc.ic.ac.uk
- X-Newsreader: mxrn 6.18-23
-
-
- In article <4hni69$8ub@tempo.univ-lyon1.fr>, dscreve@ifhamy (David Screve) writes:
-
-
- > Regarding the scheduling code, I think there is no reason
- >to delete this information. Yes, TCNestID, and such other could be
- >"Schedule Dependant", but on every multitask OS, there is only one task
- >active on a time (except on multi-processor computer, but this problem
- >can be solved by protecting memory).
-
-
- Anyway, in exec/execbase.[ih], ThisTask is commented as "readable". Doesn't
- this mean we're allowed to read it?
-
-
- Martin
-