Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:47:16 +0200
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: emacs and large-address awareness under recent snapshots
Message-ID: <20110810114716.GA23977@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
References: <4E404424.9000600@cornell.edu> <4E40526C.9080605@cornell.edu> <4E406C21.7010007@cs.umass.edu> <20110809082652.GA9492@calimero.vinschen.de> <4E4117AF.3030305@cornell.edu> <4E414054.6040206@cornell.edu> <4E4142F7.8020708@cornell.edu> <20110809152155.GB17030@calimero.vinschen.de> <4E417AB6.5070306@cornell.edu> <4E41EDE9.4040004@cornell.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4E41EDE9.4040004@cornell.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

On Aug  9 22:33, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 8/9/2011 2:21 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
> BTW, I don't necessarily have to use the malloc that comes with
> emacs. I just verified that I can build emacs so that it uses
> Cygwin's malloc.  I haven't done any testing yet to make sure there
> are no glitches, but I think it will be OK.  Assuming this is the
> case, does that simplify dealing with a heap that has two
> non-contiguous pieces?

I guess so.  Cygwin's malloc obviously uses Cygwin's heap or mmap to get
memory.  If it works, I don't see a reason to stick to emacs' own malloc
implementation.  Is emacs always using it's own malloc by default, or
is it using it's own malloc only on certain platforms?


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple