[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PURESIZE increased (again)
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: PURESIZE increased (again) |
Date: |
Sun, 23 Apr 2006 21:53:15 +0300 |
> Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:29:07 -0500 (CDT)
> From: Luc Teirlinck <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
>
> If you have so little memory that 170K is worth worrying about, you
> quite simply have not enough memory to run Emacs (and _definitely_ not
> enough memory to run things like Gnome, KDE or common web browsers
> like Mozilla). If you have so little memory that even 10K is
> non-negligible, I have no idea what you could run. Not even vi, which
> takes exactly 1 Meg. Since I doubt that vi really requires _exactly_ 1M,
> even vi, which is especially designed to work on systems with very
> little memory, does not seem to care about small fudge factors like 10K.
Luc, you simply misunderstand what I said, and so your arguments
_completely_ miss the point, so much so that they are almost absurd.
My point was twofold:
. 10KB of memory well used is nothing to worry about. However, 10KB
of _wasted_ memory is something I don't dismiss too easily, because
there are other programs running on the same machine, and while
10KB for Emacs is a negligible amount, it is certainly _not_ so for
a program with a 50KB footprint that needs to run at the same time.
. My original motivation for insisting to understand the growth was
that there could be some other factor at work here (a.k.a. ``bug'').
Now please let's stop this thread because it threatens to deteriorate
into mocking the subject, and the original problem was resolved
already.
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), (continued)
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Bill Wohler, 2006/04/23
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Luc Teirlinck, 2006/04/23
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Bill Wohler, 2006/04/23
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), David Kastrup, 2006/04/23
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Robert J. Chassell, 2006/04/23
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Richard Stallman, 2006/04/23
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again),
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/23
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Dan Nicolaescu, 2006/04/23
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/23
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Dan Nicolaescu, 2006/04/23
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/23
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Richard Stallman, 2006/04/24
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Luc Teirlinck, 2006/04/22
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Richard Stallman, 2006/04/22
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Luc Teirlinck, 2006/04/22
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/22