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: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 12:49:29 -0400 Message-ID: References: <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> <83zilvm2ud.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1477241447 9008 195.159.176.226 (23 Oct 2016 16:50:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 16:50:47 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 23 18:50:43 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 1byLyZ-0007jv-Rh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 18:50:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41752 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byLyX-0007pP-1v for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 12:50:21 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38247) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byLyQ-0007p8-PB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 12:50:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byLyM-0000Lv-SS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 12:50:14 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=43889 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byLyM-0000Li-M1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 12:50:10 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1byLy2-0004QO-Ks for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 18:49:50 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 11 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:AwHCrhYMjQ2KfmnR2EeZleLXaOs= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 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:208631 Archived-At: >> > 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. It just means that I really see no reason why it wouldn't work just fine. It's not like glibc's malloc was particularly magical, so we should be able to do the same in gmalloc.c. Stefan