From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4480 invoked from network); 7 Nov 1999 07:07:31 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 7 Nov 1999 07:07:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 17136 invoked by alias); 7 Nov 1999 07:07:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 8584 Received: (qmail 17129 invoked from network); 7 Nov 1999 07:07:20 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <991107070654.ZM4554@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 07:06:54 +0000 In-Reply-To: <19991105122341.A29632@dman.com> Comments: In reply to Clint Adams "MAXJOB" (Nov 5, 12:23pm) References: <19991105122341.A29632@dman.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: MAXJOB MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Nov 5, 12:23pm, Clint Adams wrote: } Subject: MAXJOB } } What was the reasoning behind hardcoding MAXJOB to 50? It's a fixed number so that the job table can be statically declared rather than dynamically allocated. I've forgotten (or never knew) why the value 50 was chosen, or whether there's a still-valid reason to avoid dynamic allocation of the job table. } Furthermore, why does MAXJOB 50 result in a maximum } job table size of 48? The last job table slot is reserved for tracking builtin commands, so that the whole shell doesn't become unusable when you fill up the rest of the table with external processes. It's nice to be able to kill those runaway background jobs, is it not? jobtab[0] is also reserved, but it may be for no better reason than to avoid having to map 1-based user-visible job-numbers to 0-based table locations. I don't immediately recall anything else that's being done with it. In fact, it may be that 50 was chosen so that the number of job table entries would *appear* to be a multiple of 8. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com