X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID: <3C813125.AF837508@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 20:08:05 +0000
From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Malloc/free DJGPP code
References: <10202200445 DOT AA15769 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <3C80E4AF DOT BB20511F AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <3C81177C DOT C6C49822 AT yahoo DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

CBFalconer wrote:
> 
> Richard Dawe wrote:
[snip]
> > Personally I think we should go for the faster patch - the first one -
> > since the code overhead doesn't look that great.
> 
> Take a look at the code in my nmalloc, published in this list a
> while ago.

I wish I had time to check your patch out, but I've never looked at the DJGPP
malloc code in detail. I'm also pretty busy, having just got back from a two
week business trip.

Given that the ultimate function of Charles's patches is the same, that they
take about the same effort to understand what they do, my opinion is that the
faster is the better. Charles seemed desperate for some feedback too. Which
one are you happier with, Charles?

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]