Message-Id: <199802041506.RAA05731@ankara.duzen.com.tr>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <mitch AT ankara DOT duzen DOT com DOT tr>
From: "S. M. Halloran" <mitch AT duzen DOT com DOT tr>
Organization: User RFC 822- and 1123-Compliant
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 17:07:18 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Freeing static vars
In-reply-to: <01bd2ce9$dff947a0$LocalHost@default>
Precedence: bulk

> 
> Rylan wrote:
> > > Is there anyway to free static variables under DJGPP when they have
> > > outlived their usefulness?
> > 
> > Of course not. If there were, this would mean you could *dynamically*
> > change the size of that variable (to zero). But 'dynamic' is the exact
> > contradiction of 'static'. Depending on the size of that variable,
> > this is either no problem at all, or you should have used a dynamic
> > variable in the first place.
> 
> Sorry, stupid question. I wish to apologize to the group for wasting
> its time.
> 
I know the above message is somewhat dated, but I figure on replying 
to it anyway since I just got back on the net after suffering 
connectivity problems at the hands of the fools running the service 
in this part of the woods.

I just wanted to say that Rylan's question was not stupid, am not 
sure why he (she?) inferred it was stupid from the somewhat terse 
reply to it, and hope that Rylan did not take the response 
personally, as could be assumed by Rylan's choice of wording in
the reply to the reply.  Did anybody in this list think Rylan's 
question was to the group was "wasting its time"?

Mitch Halloran
Research (Bio)chemist
Duzen Laboratories Group
Ankara   TURKEY
mitch AT duzen DOT com DOT tr

other job title:  Sequoia's (dob 12-20-95) daddy