Hi, Kelly.  Your argument makes sense.  I just not understand what you
meant by "low memory" - which I now understand you to mean that
swapping is required since the apps can not be fully loaded into memory as
a exe. 
 
However, since no programmer can know, in general, what the memory
configuration of a user might be, then that programmer must presume that
some user might not be able to fully load the entire exe, right?  Hence, it
seems, based on what you are saying, having any .exe write to itself is not
a good idea - bad procedure, right? 
 
Hmmm.  I have never thought about the issue of writing self-modifying code
- in memory on a paging system before.  
 
Of course this is very different than having a exe program write to it's
own .exe file on a HD but it is an interesting issue - to me.  Do you have
any insights you would care to share on this self-modifying code issue? 
 
I wonder if there is a way to get around this apparent problem of having a
.exe write to it's own .exe file on a HD?  Based on what you said, you have
not experimented with this type of problem, right? 
 
As I understand it, OS/2 is fully multi-tasking, hence it is possible for
one task to intiate another task to run concurrently with other tasks and
that sub-tasks can intiate other sub-tasks to some level of nesting in this
manner, right? 
 
I do not fully understand how swapping takes place under OS/2 - to what
extent facilities are available to a programmer to control this swapping
process as say there is under DOS via overlays where the programmer has
control to determine what is in memory or not. 
 
Since some programmers apparently feel there is value in having their exe
modify the exe copy on HD I wonder if IBM has specifically addressed this
issue and may have come up with some answers or alternatives. 
 
Regards, -= Lou =-  
 
--- PC-RAIN 1.00  (á1)