> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Starkey [mailto:jas@...]
> Sent: Lunes 7 de Mayo de 2001 9:51

[snip]

> On the other hand, the super-server has no need for a shared
> memory based event manager. Ditching the shared memory mechanism
> would also eliminate the need to ackward region relative addresses
> necessary to keep the event manager data structure position
> independent. A faster, cheaper, more flexible event manager
> should be a dividend of the super server architecture.

Can you explain that phrase in more detail, please? I'm not sure I
understand how this piece of code works. Does SS still suffer from the
limitations of the classic's event manager, for example?

C.