From: Gregory Colvin (gregory.colvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-27 12:00:26
On Wednesday, Aug 27, 2003, at 10:37 America/Denver, E. Gladyshev wrote:
>> "E. Gladyshev" <egladysh_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>> Sure he could have replaced the system allocator (I actually
>>> suggested it too)
>>> but why would he want to do it?
>>> The standard system allocator worked just fine for the rest of his
>>> Why would he want to implement a full blown memory manager.
>> He would not. He would pick an off-the-shelf memory manager such as
>> dlmalloc that has been shown to perform well in a wide variety of
> Perhaps, he did not want to distribute dlmalloc with his library.
> It doen't matter. It is all about choice.
> Is dlmalloc deterministic?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk