From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: When should ralloc.c be used? Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 19:45:14 +0300 Message-ID: <83zilvm2ud.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87eg51ng4r.fsf_-_@users.sourceforge.net> <87k2djwumn.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83h98nidvd.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg3rvtsf.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83k2dihpm9.fsf@gnu.org> <8760p2wzgj.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <838ttyhhzu.fsf@gnu.org> <871szqwu51.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <831szqhbc2.fsf@gnu.org> <87d1itt79z.fsf_-_@users.sourceforge.net> <7baa18d4-2b09-caa8-005e-29008a383ad1@cs.ucla.edu> <83mvhwrgd5.fsf@gnu.org> <8539f38f-9a11-44c3-4de7-bb974c96206c@cs.ucla.edu> <838ttfnmev.fsf@gnu.org> <837f8znk8f.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1477241180 16325 195.159.176.226 (23 Oct 2016 16:46:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 16:46:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 23 18:46:17 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1byLuS-0002ma-U0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 18:46:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41737 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byLuV-0006Jk-95 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 12:46:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36733) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byLto-0005zJ-Vw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 12:45:29 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byLtk-000757-4z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 12:45:29 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:36218) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byLtk-000752-1q; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 12:45:24 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3196 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1byLti-00027v-Ju; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 12:45:23 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Sun, 23 Oct 2016 12:30:32 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:208630 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 12:30:32 -0400 > > > I don't think we ever used such a configuration. Is modern sbrk good > > enough for gmalloc? > > Why not? "Why not" is never a useful answer.