On May 19, 4:07Â pm, ***@antispam.ham wrote:
> NB <***@gmail.com> writes:
> >>>> Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
> >>>>> Steven Levine wrote:
> >>>>>>> Why only user programs ? It's perfectly possible that there is a bug in
> >>>>>>> OS2KRNL whre it attempts to divide by zero due to a non-expected divisor
> >>>>>>> value ...
> >>>>>> I've always found the naming of trap 0 interesting. =A0My experience that it
> >>>>>> occurs more often when the dividend is too large.
> >>>>> When the dividend is too large and/or the divisor is too small.
> >>>>> Remember the old Borland runtime library error 200 on faster (of the day) CPUs?
> >>>>> That was a 'divide by zero' error where it wasn't dividing by zero.
> >>>>> The meaning of the exception is actually 'divide overflow' - it's just that
> >>>>> it is usually caused by dividing by zero because that always generates that
> >>>>> exception.
> >>>> I can see user programs doing that, and they can crash without taking down
> >>>> the system.
> >>> What you see is irrelevant, Tholen.
> >> Further proof that you are a troll, nobuyout.
> > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim from Tholen.
>
> On the contrary, the substantiation was provided, nobuyout.
So that means you are a troll, Tholen, given that you have frequently
told people that what they see is irrelevant.
> >> You're so obsessed that
> >> you're following me around to another newsgroup.
> > Classic erroneous presupposition,
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim from Tholen.
>
> > given that I have used OS/2 in the past.
>
> Doesn't change the fact that you followed me to this newsgroup, nobuyout.
Classic erroneous presupposition, given that I can visit this
newsgroup without seeking you out, Tholen.
> >>>> But shouldn't the system protect itself from such a crash by
> >>>> testing for the exception and avoiding it?
> >>> Only if the software engineers programmed such a test into the system,
> >>> Tholen.
> >> Classic begging of the question.
> > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim from Tholen.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim from nobuyout.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim from Tholen.
>
> >> But not unexpected from a troll
> > Classic erroneous presupposition.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim from Tholen.
>
> >> who has no real intent of addressing the issue at hand.
> > More proof that Tholen is a troll,
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim from Tholen.
>
> > given that I provided a valid answer to his question,
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim from Tholen.
>
> > and he responded with an antagonistic reply.
>
> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim from Tholen.