1. Ver 4.0 MANAGED_MEM question
- Posted by bernie Sep 17, 2008
- 1023 views
Could someone explained to me what the difference is between
win98 memory allocation and other OS's ?
I thought that Rob's memory allocation scheme was the most efficient
method that he had come up with his exprience over the years.
Was there something wrong with original allocation scheme ?
What was the purpose for changing it ?
PS:
Open Watcom is creating new Win32 headers and libraries to eliminate
the dependency on MinGW
Does anyone know how this may effect using Watcom to build Euphoria
I know Rob was using Watcom for it speed etc. ; I hope this won't cause
any problems.
2. Re: Ver 4.0 MANAGED_MEM question
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Sep 17, 2008
- 972 views
Could someone explained to me what the difference is between
win98 memory allocation and other OS's ?
I thought that Rob's memory allocation scheme was the most efficient
method that he had come up with his exprience over the years.
Was there something wrong with original allocation scheme ?
What was the purpose for changing it ?
Windows 9x has serious bugs and flaws with regards to its builtin memory management and heap management.
If you allocate and free too many small objects (which we do) then on 9x you will run out of memory even though you have plently of "free" memory.
Also, 9x has pointers aligned to 4. Eu requires pointers aligned to 8, and MANAGED_MEM works around this.
I have not compared MANAGED_MEM and ESIMPLE_MALLOC on other OSes and do not know what difference it makes, if any, there.
PS:
Open Watcom is creating new Win32 headers and libraries to eliminate
the dependency on MinGW
Does anyone know how this may effect using Watcom to build Euphoria
I know Rob was using Watcom for it speed etc. ; I hope this won't cause
any problems.
My work with MinGW showed that there was not a significant slowdown when using MinGW gcc directly, in comparison to OpenWatcom.
