In article <1992Aug14.222345.25302@crd.ge.com> davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) writes:
quoted text
>In article <1992Aug14.162250.19760@ods.com>, david@ods.com (David Engel) writes:
>| william E Davidsen (davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM) wrote:
>| :   If you didn't want to use the jump tables, you don't load the module
>| : and you get linked to the real routines directly in memory in the slib.
>| : The advantage of this is that you get all the benefits of the current
>| : slib implementation in terms of performance.
>| 
>| Actually, we've already done that in the latest test release.
>
>Bravo! Then everyone will be able to make the best compromise for them.
>-- 
>bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345

agreed.  And, I've finally come to realize that the primary changing
going on is in the Libs.  Since the kernel is still evolving I can
understand at least some change in the Libs.  However, I understand
that RS is working on a new version of GCC.  What happens when that
is released?  Will jump tables solve that problem too?  
I am also led to believe that fixing the jump table versions includes
fixing the non jumptable versions.  As long as this is valid I have
absolutely no concern with Jump tables except occasionly the perfomance hit
of the extra layer of indirection.

Hubert Bahr     hab@engr.ucf.edu