Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      15 Mar 2002 22:22:02 +0100
From:      Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>
To:        John Indra <maverick@office.naver.co.id>
Cc:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: malloc() and the stock Perl in -CURRENT (and -STABLE)
Message-ID:  <xzpit7xo7b9.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
In-Reply-To: <20020314132451.F8244@office.naver.co.id>
References:  <20020314104525.B8244@office.naver.co.id> <40628.1016085846@critter.freebsd.dk> <20020314132451.F8244@office.naver.co.id>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Indra <maverick@office.naver.co.id> writes:
> Glad to know that there is no problem with malloc() in -CURRENT. But I still
> think that this must be addressed in Perl. So maybe, the stock Perl should
> be built against its own malloc library?

No!  That would break anything that loads system libraries into Perl,
like Authen::PAM, because you'd end up calling system malloc()
followed by Perl free(), or the other way around.

Please stop pretending this is a FreeBSD bug - it's a bug in Perl,
which anally tries to conserve microscopic amounts of memory by
growing strings in small increments instead of using the traditional
(and far more efficient and elegant) 2n + 1 algorithm.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpit7xo7b9.fsf>