4 ms·
> VMS had asynchronous programming to its core. Most system calls could be performed synchronously or async. This continued, of course, in its spiritual succes
by EvanAnderson 2y ago
> VMS had asynchronous programming to its core. Most system calls could be performed synchronously or async.
This continued, of course, in its spiritual successor Windows NT.
- not2b 2y agoYes, same architect (Dave Cutler), and WNT is (V+1)(M+1)(S+1) though they probably didn't do that on purpose.
- rbanffy 2y ago> though they probably didn't do that on purpose. Of course they didn’t (wink wink)
- rollcat 2y agoFor those curious, look up IO completion ports. Back when all I knew was select(2), it blew my mind.
- hulitu 2y ago> This continued, of course, in its spiritual successor Windows NT. I think NT still had problems with interactivity when the parralel port was used (interrupts)
- EvanAnderson 2y agoI can't say I did much w/ NT and parallel ports beyond attaching printers. I'd imagine it could be pretty awful in the "SPP" days, especially with people trying to connect ZIP drives, "Backpack" CD-ROM drives, tape drives, etc. I suspect floppy drives, which I also didn't use under NT very much, could also play hell w/ interactivity.