In this case the flag is 3 which the manual says makes the calling
process suspend itself.  So perhaps the child is activating the parent
when it's finished and then the parent is killing the child.

I'm not sure why they would want to do that as simply calling QUIT or
STOP RUN or whatever in the child process would do the same.

In article <[log in to unmask]>,
[log in to unmask] says...
> Hi Peter,
>
> ACTIVATE has a flag that determines whether the parent runs in parallel or waits until the child is done.
>
> Frank Gribbin
> Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Smithson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 6:17 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [HP3000-L] Another newbie intrinsic question. (createprocess
> etc.)
>
>
> I've got some code from a customer that does this -
>
> CREATEPROCESS
> if pin is not zero
>         ACTIVATE
>         KILL
>
> I only have a basic understanding of these intrinsics but as I
> understand it, that code will create a process and then activate it.  So
> at this point both the parent and the child are running in parallel?
>
> But if that's the case then won't the KILL just stop the child quite
> early on in it's execution - so what's the point in starting it?
>
> If I'm wrong about the running in parallel bit and the ACTIVATE waits
> for the child to finish then why kill it?
>
> Any idea what this code could be trying to do?
>
> Thanks
>
> Peter
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
>

--
http://www.beluga.freeserve.co.uk

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *