From: Hans-Bernhard Broeker Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Logging data from an interrupt to a file Date: 18 Jul 2002 09:59:24 GMT Organization: Aachen University of Technology (RWTH) Lines: 30 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: acp3bf.physik.rwth-aachen.de X-Trace: nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE 1026986364 19228 137.226.32.75 (18 Jul 2002 09:59:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse AT rwth-aachen DOT de NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Jul 2002 09:59:24 GMT Originator: broeker@ To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Thomas Harte wrote: [...] > assuming that I don't have the memory to log all keypresses and then > write them to disc when the second program terminates. Why not? Let's see: how fast can even a *very* fast human type? Ten keys per second, or let's say a hundred (even the typematic isn't that fast)? If you let that person hack away freely for as long as (s)he can stay awake, that'll be on the order of one hundred thousand seconds times 100 keys per seconds, for a total of 10 Megabytes. If that person is *extremely* fast and can keep up that pace for 30 hours on end, that is. And you say you don't have memory for that? In a DJGPP application? I'd say that compared to the probability of anyone ever managing to type 10 Megabytes in one session, the hassles you'll run into if you try to actually do multi-tasking on DOS, with one of the two tasks being an arbitrary, unknown, potentially incooprerative piece of software written by someone else, are not worth going into. It's not strictly impossible, but very hard to achieve that. You'ld have to catch just about every single interrupt call the daughter program could make to DOS, BIOS or whatever. Essentially, you'ld have to run the daughter in a fully virtualized DOS machine, i.e. reinvent Windows 3.1. -- Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de) Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.