Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 13:12:15 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: "John M. Aldrich" <fighteer AT cs DOT com>
cc: Nate Eldredge <nate AT cartsys DOT com>, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>,
        djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Available memory
In-Reply-To: <353BF5F3.1C81@cs.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980421131204.1009B-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Mon, 20 Apr 1998, John M. Aldrich wrote:

> Okay, that's fine with me.  I don't see how it can hurt anything, except
> that users will come whining instead that they can't allocate as much
> memory as coreleft() claims they can.

If the docs doesn't say they can use the value returned to allocate a
single chunk, then I don't see any problem with that.

Besides, if we care, we can always provide other functions which
adjust their return functions as appropriate for the DPMI host/malloc
version at hand.  I think we know enough to do that by now.