From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: When should ralloc.c be used? Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 14:51:56 -0400 Message-ID: References: <8539f38f-9a11-44c3-4de7-bb974c96206c@cs.ucla.edu> <838ttfnmev.fsf@gnu.org> <837f8znk8f.fsf@gnu.org> <83zilvm2ud.fsf@gnu.org> <83r377m0i8.fsf@gnu.org> <83eg36n6v5.fsf@gnu.org> <83shrl523p.fsf@gnu.org> <838ttd4u0e.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1477335515 12930 195.159.176.226 (24 Oct 2016 18:58:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 18:58:35 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 24 20:58:32 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 1bykRo-0000lq-IL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 20:58:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48980 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bykRq-0003ef-T0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 14:58:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33565) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bykLq-0007IO-PT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 14:52:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bykLl-0005vS-SS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 14:52:02 -0400 Original-Received: from chene.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.20]:38981) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bykLl-0005vM-Nw; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 14:51:57 -0400 Original-Received: from pastel.home (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by chene.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.7/8.14.1) with ESMTP id u9OIpupI004309; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 14:51:57 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 17C0E6047D; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 14:51:56 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <838ttd4u0e.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 24 Oct 2016 19:00:17 +0300") X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Level: X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0.1 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 3 Rules triggered GEN_SPAM_FEATRE=0.1, EDT_SA_DN_PASS=0, RV5837=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9418 : core <5837> : inlines <5363> : streams <1717468> : uri <2314034> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.20 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:208734 Archived-At: > But we have successfully used the glibc's malloc, without mmap, for > years without any sign of fragmentation problems. Yes, glibc's malloc was good enough. I'm not sure that applies to gmalloc.c. Stefan