winscape 2224

I see. So it's some sort of clairvoyant-mystical thing, then. Great. I'd like to see the DOCs on that. Please provide a link.

"Physician, heal thyself."

"Memory management" (in the sense you mean it) is not something that DOS was designed to do. And, indeed, it isn't necessary.

Remember, DOS is natively a single-user, single-tasking O.S. All available memory is available to the running app. The programmer can "manage" that memory from within the app, if desired; the DOS API allows for this.

But it's not the O.S.'s job.

Of course it exists. True 16-bit DOS uses some permutation of the FAT16 file system. Its "integrity" is perfect...unless something screws it up.

But you don't actually mean "file system integrity." What you mean is some sort of built-in protection scheme to prevent the File Allocation Table from being trashed.

This is beyond the scope of DOS's design parameters. And frankly, in real-world usage, it's almost never a problem.

In any case, DOS maintains a second copy of the FAT for just such a contingency. In the rare event that the FAT gets trashed, the second copy can be over-layed onto the trashed copy, and the file system is "restored" -- except for the particular event which corrupted the FAT.

Again, it must be reiterated that pre-emptive FAT "protection" is beyond the design parameters of DOS. You can disagree with that design philosophy, if you wish, but that doesn't necessarily make you 'right.'

I mean, I could be ticked off over the fact that you don't have a privates, but that would be silly. After all, a privates is not within your particular design parameters. See? Hehe!

As written, this makes no sense. Please re-phrase it, clari- fying what you mean, and give a specific example.

You're generalizing again. Be specific. Give us one example of such a "bug."

Please give us one specific example of such an "approved-by-the- computing-business" "standard" that DOS "breaks."

Dunno. You might know something about DEC OSes, but apparently you didn't learn much about DOS.

But not DEC software. Probably Unix.

Anyway, once the message is posted, its disposition is out of my hands...as you well know. So this is a red herring.

How is this "changing the subject?"

Try to stay focused for...oh, two or three contiguous seconds, okay?

Besides...anybody who worked for the company that produced the 'Rainbow' is hardly in a position to be arrogant. Y'know? Hehehe!