From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Aligned blocks management: obsolete? Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 20:11:50 +0200 Message-ID: <83iplllkwp.fsf@gnu.org> References: <4EE5B744.1090103@yandex.ru> <4EE60A93.9060401@yandex.ru> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1323713560 29581 80.91.229.12 (12 Dec 2011 18:12:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:12:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Antipov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 12 19:12:36 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RaAMd-0003sr-Ld for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 19:12:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56932 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RaAMd-0001xD-0A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:12:35 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:58344) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RaAMa-0001x6-Pe for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:12:33 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RaAMW-0002is-Fc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:12:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:60326) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RaAMW-0002ih-81 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:12:28 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LW300K00RVG8200@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 20:11:47 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.124.128.192]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LW300KY8RVN7S00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 20:11:47 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <4EE60A93.9060401@yandex.ru> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.175 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:146675 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:07:15 +0400 > From: Dmitry Antipov > > > Can you please tell what you mean by that? Are you alluding to > > lisp_align_malloc and its subroutines, or to something else? > > Yes. I'm just curious about comment above lisp_align_malloc - > the comment references glibc-2.3.2, which was released ~8 years ago :-). > > > I hope Emacs is not on its way to become a glibc-only project. Quite > > a few supported platforms don't use glibc: Cygwin, *BSD (AFAIK), > > Windows. > > That's why I'm asking for. I suppose that any non-ancient glibc malloc > doesn't require such a glitch in lisp_align_malloc any more - but > I have no ideas about malloc implementation on other supported systems. Can you formulate the misfeatures which lisp_align_malloc protects against? Then perhaps it would be possible to see whether gmalloc and ralloc solve them. TIA