Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2003/06/17/23:17:37
Richard Dawe wrote:
> CBFalconer wrote:
> > Richard Dawe wrote:
> > >
> > ... snip ...
> > >
> > > I don't think it would be hard to implement. I'd do it myself,
> > > except that I can't contribute any code at the moment, because
> > > I need a disclaimer from my new employer.
> >
> [snip]
> > I don't remember seeing any mention of it here. I am very leery
> > of saying I can do anything now, because I expect to be taking off
> > for a couple of months shortly. I can see my way to implementing
> > it within nmalloc, though, if it doesn't need a special realloc.
>
> It was committed to CVS on 20 Jan 2001, according to my archives of
> djgpp-cvs.
>
> Now I'm getting slightly frustrated - I feel like I'm banging my
> head against a wall. We've tried gently persuading you to look at
> CVS or a snapshot of CVS from MartinS every time nmalloc has come
> up recently. Now you say you didn't know about memalign. That's
> not really surprising, since you haven't looked at CVS (or a
> snapshot thereof).
<rant>
Now take a look at the frustrations from my viewpoint. As a user,
about 1.5 years ago, I found a serious deficiency in malloc. I
volunteered to build a replacement. I was told to get on this
list, and did. The discussions were basically "why don't you
patch the existing", and I said the structure was incompatible.
So I built a replacement, over about a month, and posted it. (It
solved the O(N*N) probems I was having, which I found in several
other systems). I was fairly proud of it.
Then somebody pipes up about the debuggery systems. I had already
put in provisions for such, without the set of hooks. Eventually
a set of specifications were posted/found (the info .txh file),
and I built something to match. Then a new set of requirements
appeared - make matching documentation for something I had never
used, the info preparation system. I did so. The next was a
demand for warning free compilation under a set of switches I had
never used. I did so. Then the switches turn out to be wrong (I
am getting more recent, so more detailed). Fixed. Now I hear
about memalign!
The malldbg system was built from documentation that somebody gave
me detailed instructions on 'how to acquire', which instructions
are long gone from my memory and system. They produced a flurry
of exchanges here as to permissable extensions and modification.
I think the result was a good package, in fact better than the
model it was built on, and reasonably idiot luser proof.
I have no urge to learn a new system, and install who knows what,
for each baby step. I have never used CVS, have no idea how to
access your archives, am short of disk space, and don't want to
spend money on lengthy connect times. I did download the existing
library source and look at some spots way back, and none of this
was apparent. That was long past the 2001 date you mention.
Somewhere along the line the CVS archive was brought up.
I did take a look at the CVS documentation, and it is unclear to
me. It may be perfectly simple (probably is, once you get past
the start), but meanwhile "here there be monsters". I am
certainly not going to move some unknown tens or hundreds of
megabytes onto this system when I don't have any use for it. I
already have too many squirrel instincts, just ask my wife. I
haven't spoken (in person) to anyone with a real idea of
programming and system programming for at least three years, maybe
ten. This medium is conducive to misunderstanding and
misconception, since you can't grab a piece of chalk and scribble
a diagram.
I am still willing to install something that allows the memalign
call to work, but this will get right into the warp and woof of
the design. It is a potential source of evil insects, inasmuch as
the possibility was not allowed for initially. I have grave
doubts about the usefulness of such _for DJGPP_ in the first
place. The nmalloc code does not have adequate regression
testing, because I could never figure out a way of faking the sbrk
calls in such a way as to return a preknown sequence of absolute
addresses independent of system, compiler, whatever.
I am not working with modern high speed machinery, wide band
links, etc. I don't see any great need for them. I have a
perfectly stable system, pretty well under control, and limited
time and energy. I have saved uncounted thousands by resisting
any urges to upgrade, and who knows how much frustration. The
cost is that I am dependant on this system remaining functional,
as I have no other available. As I have aged I have come to
realize that I am not eventually going to learn everything about
everything, and have put limits on my probing in self defence.
</rant>
--
Chuck F (cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com) (cbfalconer AT worldnet DOT att DOT net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> USE worldnet address!
- Raw text -