"Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com> wrote:
> That's *not* abomination. How about pre-allocating over 100 Mb for X
> Free, for instance?

What about it? If an application does not need 100MB, it should not
malloc it. If it does need it, it should malloc it and know that it
is available if the malloc succeeds.

> Basically, if you don't have enough memory, you just don't have enough
> memory.

Yes, and the application should be told this via the standard
documented interface for doing so, i.e. returning NULL from
malloc().

> What FreeBSD does *reduces* the need for memory. If FreeBSD *did
> not* do it, then you'd need much more memory.

Why? Are there really such a lot of applications allocating vastly
more memory than they actually use?

Cheers


Jon
-- 
\/ Jon Ribbens / jon@oaktree.co.uk