Message-ID: <390DA810.EC01A2E7@maths.unine.ch>
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 17:51:44 +0200
From: Gautier <gautier DOT demontmollin AT maths DOT unine DOT ch>
Organization: Maths - Uni =?iso-8859-1?Q?Neuch=E2tel?=
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: 3rd Try: Maybe an asm problem? (Problems linking)
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000501140345 DOT 10196A-100000 AT is> <390D67E4 DOT C48A1A4F AT mtu-net DOT ru> <390D84C5 DOT 197E6545 AT maths DOT unine DOT ch> <390D93E1 DOT 74B5DFB2 AT mtu-net DOT ru>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: mac13-32.unine.ch
X-Trace: 1 May 2000 17:51:44 +0100, mac13-32.unine.ch
Lines: 20
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

"Alexei A. Frounze":

> I don't need 20 command.coms :)

Oh, really ?

> Okay, why not to freeze up DOS programs, due to task switch (it's possible to
> know when a task switch occurs)?

Maybe there is another "Freeze me" Int2F that provides it ?
Anyway the difference is not that big, so the "Release time slice" is 
still useful - better than no Int2F at all...
In addition, the program may have a bit more than nothing to do, but just
a few, that can be done slowly.

In fact you can/wish simply use a task switcher instead of preemptive multitasker
("taskmgr /s" instead of "taskmgr") :-)

_____________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/