Actually, zombies are the recently dead. As in, still have meat that can be animated. And if you think them freezing won't stop them, you have no business on/.
If that is the case, one could make an argument that such restrictions were unconstitutional OR could be argued that laws restricting would not be in the best interests of either party.
In computing, Inter-process communication (IPC) is a set of techniques for the exchange of data among multiple threads in one or more processes. Processes may be running on one or more computers connected by a network. IPC techniques are divided into methods for message passing, synchronization, shared memory, and remote procedure calls (RPC). The method of IPC used may vary based on the bandwidth and latency of communication between the threads, and the type of data being communicated.
You mention that control primitives and IPC are pretty important and imply that Mach handled them differently. I'll give you that.
Upon further reading on XNU, XNU seems to contradict the Mach (kernel) entry entirely:
The Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) portion of the kernel provides the POSIX API (BSD system calls), the Unix process model atop Mach tasks, basic security policies, user and group ids, permissions, the network stack, the virtual file system code (including a filesystem independent journalling layer), several local file systems such as HFS/HFS+, the Network File System (NFS) client and server, cryptographic framework, UNIX System V inter-process communication (IPC), Audit subsystem, mandatory access control, and some of the locking primitives. The BSD code present in XNU came from the FreeBSD kernel. Although much of it has been significantly modified, code sharing still occurs between Apple and the FreeBSD Project.[citation needed][dubious – discuss]
You'll note I bolded two sections. Seems more was taken from FreeBSD and not a lot of Mach's original stuff.
Neither Mac OS X nor FreeBSD maintain the microkernel structure pioneered in Mach, although Mac OS X continues to offer microkernel Inter-Process Communication and control primitives for use directly by applications.
Originally developed by NeXT for the NeXTSTEP operating system, XNU was a hybrid kernel combining version 2.5 of the Mach kernel developed at Carnegie Mellon University with components from 4.3BSD and an object-oriented API for writing drivers called Driver Kit.
Oh hey, how about that, components from 4.3BSD (arguably not FreeBSD, but it is BSD).
Neither Mac OS X nor FreeBSD maintain the microkernel structure pioneered in Mach, although Mac OS X continues to offer microkernel Inter-Process Communication and control primitives for use directly by applications.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, zombies are the recently dead. As in, still have meat that can be animated. And if you think them freezing won't stop them, you have no business on /.
I didn't even notice what website it was, I was more interested in the article. (:
also, please link to the first page of the story:
http://www.cracked.com/article_18683_7-scientific-reasons-zombie-outbreak-would-fail-quickly.html
This article is the reason why idle.slashdot.org exists.
If that is the case, one could make an argument that such restrictions were unconstitutional OR could be argued that laws restricting would not be in the best interests of either party.
Have you not read any of the links I've posted (links to the articles for Mach (kernel) and XNU)?
wow
hrm.
heard that.
Actually wouldn't that fall under the domain of the Feds considering it is interstate?
also, I imagine this ruling could be used in arguments to strike down that law via the court system.
Not in TN (and it shouldn't be, IMO).
Well, I didn't want to say it was pretty self-explanatory, but in reality it is!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-process_communication
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_flow is the closest I could get to control primitives. Am I far off?
You mention that control primitives and IPC are pretty important and imply that Mach handled them differently. I'll give you that.
Upon further reading on XNU, XNU seems to contradict the Mach (kernel) entry entirely:
You'll note I bolded two sections. Seems more was taken from FreeBSD and not a lot of Mach's original stuff.
But "Ah-ha!" you'll say:
Really not supporting your argument.
Seems like the Mach and XNU articles need to be updated so they don't contradict each other.
Nor is it Mach, now is it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_(kernel)
...
I didn't expect it to get a +1 funny, as I wasn't trying to be humorous (not entirely).
I just have a problem with the dating methods in use.
You read the article?!
You must be new to /. (though I see your number and know that's not true). :p
Oh hey, I'm not anti-science (oh hey, I'm using a computer developed with science, how about that).
Besides the point. Mac OS X (nor BSD) doesn't use Mach (anymore), though it retains two of its features (though not BSD).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XNU
Oh hey, how about that, components from 4.3BSD (arguably not FreeBSD, but it is BSD).
Meh, I know. Maths fail.
Oh I'm fully aware of it. But there is a higher probability of proving theories about the universe than about the human mind.
oy, you're right. $480/year
And from the second link, which you handily ignore:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_(kernel) [wikipedia.org]