> Yea, I think starting out with a simpler scheduler would be best. But we > have to make sure our IScheduler, and whatever other type instances it > consumes, are generic enough for our needs. If we want to be able to > interchange different schedulers, we have to make sure that we abstract the > commonalities between different scheduler implementations' schemas.
It's a bit complicated to abstract everything, because some schedulers take things like processes blocking for IO (or mutex?) into account too. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ SharpOS-Developers mailing list SharpOS-Developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sharpos-developers
