From: "Mark E." <snowball3 AT softhome DOT net>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 16:05:52 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: nmalloc integration issues: memalign, names
Message-ID: <3EF08DE0.7578.552473@localhost>
In-reply-to: <3EF0BF62.11E71044@yahoo.com>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.11)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-description: Mail message body
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

> I think somebody has their head-firmly-up if they are making gcc
> depend on these non-standardisms.  It is going to become
> impossible to port.
> 

You do have a point here. The current gcc uses a different method other than 
using valloc/memalign when mmap support is absent. Smalltalk at one time 
allowed valloc and memalign in place of mmap, but the current version I just 
downloaded has no such feature - you either support memory mapping or get 
lost. 

Therefore I question if it is indeed worth the trouble to port a pair of 
functions deprecated by posix if doing so is non-trivial.

Mark