On May 26, 2007, at 20:31 , J J wrote:

>> From: Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>
>> Reply-To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list<squeak- 
>> dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>> To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list<squeak- 
>> dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>> Subject: Re: Multiple processes using #nextPutAll:
>> Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 20:00:08 +0200
>>
>> That would mean you could only have 4 process switches per second   
>> which obviously is not true.
>
> Oh, I'm confused again.  Normal OS'es usually have a 250ms  
> quantum.  I think they said Squeak was 40 or so.

Perhaps we're talking past each other. Anyway, this shouldn't matter  
for the problem at hand.

>> Only if there is a single process at that priority. It's as if  
>> the  process had called #yield voluntarily - the next runnable  
>> process of  the same priority will be resumed once all higher- 
>> priority processes  stopped.
>
> Yes, much like how modern OS'es work.  It's just that I was under  
> the impression that once the current process is interrupted that  
> another at that same priority would be given a chance to run.

Yes, that's what I wrote.

- Bert -