Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 23:34:55 +0300
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id: <2561-Thu24Apr2003233455+0300-eliz@elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to: <3EA82F6D.40414228@yahoo.com> (message from CBFalconer on Thu, 24
	Apr 2003 14:39:41 -0400)
Subject: Re: nmalloc revisited
References: <200304231105 DOT NAA07336 AT lws256 DOT lu DOT erisoft DOT se> <3EA67D55 DOT 63EF458C AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <3EA69078 DOT 48E745D9 AT yahoo DOT com> <3EA783FC DOT C4BEA2BD AT yahoo DOT com> <3EA82F6D DOT 40414228 AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 14:39:41 -0400
> From: CBFalconer <cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com>
> 
> Following is a horrible hackup of the malloc.txh file.  Maybe
> someone who knows what they are doing can clean it up somewhat and
> return it to me, and I can then try to maintain the internal
> components.

Thanks.

However, could you please post only the diffs (produced by the command
"diff -c malloc.old malloc.txh", where malloc.old is the original
version from the CVS), instead of the whole file?  The diffs make it
much easier to see what's changed.

TIA