At 12:56 AM 9/18/2001 +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:54:41PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At 12:51 AM 9/18/2001 +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > > > > Doug Lea's malloc is in the public domain:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://g.oswego.edu/dl/html/malloc.html
> > > > >
On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:54:41PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 12:51 AM 9/18/2001 +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > > > Doug Lea's malloc is in the public domain:
> > > >
> > > > http://g.oswego.edu/dl/html/malloc.html
> > > >
> > > > I don't remember whether that's quadsafe code but the fir
At 12:51 AM 9/18/2001 +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > > Doug Lea's malloc is in the public domain:
> > >
> > > http://g.oswego.edu/dl/html/malloc.html
> > >
> > > I don't remember whether that's quadsafe code but the first person to
> >
> > It is.
> >
> > Further digging found this comparison
At 12:38 AM 9/18/2001 +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:29:11PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > Don't sweat system malloc behaviour all that much at the moment. We are
> > going to be completely taking over memory allocation internally at some
> > point reas
> > Doug Lea's malloc is in the public domain:
> >
> > http://g.oswego.edu/dl/html/malloc.html
> >
> > I don't remember whether that's quadsafe code but the first person to
>
> It is.
>
> Further digging found this comparison discussing malloc and gc
> implementations:
>
> http://www.cs.color
On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 12:38:01AM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:29:11PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > Don't sweat system malloc behaviour all that much at the moment. We are
> > going to be completely taking over memory allocation internally at som
On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:29:11PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Don't sweat system malloc behaviour all that much at the moment. We are
> going to be completely taking over memory allocation internally at some
> point reasonably soon, so as long as what you do doesn't crash we should
> Don't sweat system malloc behaviour all that much at the moment. We are
> going to be completely taking over memory allocation internally at some
> point reasonably soon, so as long as what you do doesn't crash we should
be
> fine. (It's OK to leak at this point--either the GC system or the
