> On dinsdag, sep 16, 2003, at 14:55 Europe/Brussels, Matt Emson wrote: > > > Got you. So the correct term would be 'multiprocess'. I always forget > > that > > UNIX considers processes to be seperate to threads. BeOS does things > > slightly differently. We have the notion of 'teams'. A thread belongs > > to a > > 'team'. All threads are effectively light weight processes. However, > > and I > > forget the exact reason, a team is not an exact equivilence to a UNIX > > process. > > This has nothing to do with unix <-> BeOS. For example, Solaris is > definitely Unix and also uses the concept of light weight processes.
Light weight processes are a Unix feature. (heavy and cheap are relative to the other) Windows -> heavy processes, cheap threads. Unix -> cheap processes, expensive threads Moreover Windows schedules threads, doesn't even treat processes differently. Traditional unix didn't do this either, but several modern OSes (like FreeBSD 5 (KSE)) can. > Different OS'es simply use different process models. The differences are classic, but just like many other points in the traditional unix vs mach kernel discussion, things are getting more blurred because of cross-pollination. (think messaging, kernel loadable modules, "special" kernel related servers in unix, moving of systems in kernel on mach kernels out of speed reasons) _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
