Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > Memory consumption

Reply
Thread Tools

Memory consumption

 
 
Kaz Kylheku
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2009
On 2009-03-14, CBFalconer <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> References: [...] <(E-Mail Removed)> [.. ]
> Kaz Kylheku wrote:


And so the mental killfile breaks down. Amazing endurance. Is this a new
personal best for Chucky? Judges?
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Joachim Schmitz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2009
Han from China wrote:
> Joachim Schmitz wrote:
>> Han from China wrote:
>>> I don't see sbrk() in my copy of the C standard.

>>
>> That's most probably why he wrote: "on any system that supplies sbrk"

>
> Right. So if people start providing Web links to software that uses,
> say, POSIX threads, with the comment "should work on any system that
> supplies POSIX threads", Falconer won't complain, right?


Probably not, so seems you're right for a change

> You don't need to answer that.


Oops, too late

Bye, Jojo
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Joachim Schmitz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-15-2009
Han from China wrote:
> Joachim Schmitz wrote:
>>> Falconer won't complain, right?

>>
>> Probably not

>
> Well, the archives reveal that you're most probably wrong.


ahem, sorry, double negate got me. As you coule have spotted by the rest of
that line, which you snipped. Restored here:

>Probably not, so seems you're right for a change


So the 'not' shouldn't heve been there.

Bye, Jojo

 
Reply With Quote
 
Joachim Schmitz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-15-2009
Richard wrote:
> "Joachim Schmitz" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>> Han from China wrote:
>>> Joachim Schmitz wrote:
>>>> Han from China wrote:
>>>>> I don't see sbrk() in my copy of the C standard.
>>>>
>>>> That's most probably why he wrote: "on any system that supplies
>>>> sbrk"
>>>
>>> Right. So if people start providing Web links to software that uses,
>>> say, POSIX threads, with the comment "should work on any system that
>>> supplies POSIX threads", Falconer won't complain, right?

>>
>> Probably not, so seems you're right for a change

>
> Sorry? What? Do you have Chuck killfiled?


No. I'me the proud owner of an empty killfile. I don't need to rely on a
machine to decide what I read, see and reply to or not.

The 'not' was simply a mistake, as could have been easily deducted from the
rest of that sentence.

Bye, Jojo

 
Reply With Quote
 
Joachim Schmitz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-15-2009
Richard Heathfield wrote:
> Joachim Schmitz said:

<snip>
>> The 'not' was simply a mistake, as could have been easily deducted
>> from the rest of that sentence.

>
> Whilst it would certainly be convenient to be able to deduct
> (subtract) mistakes from sentences, I think you meant "deduce"
> (conclude in a logical fashion).


Yes, thanks.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Low power consumption board with memory Duccio VHDL 0 02-25-2006 10:12 PM
Per-session memory consumption in ASP.NET worker process Jim Campbell ASP .Net 1 02-12-2004 05:48 PM
aspnet_wp.exe was recycled because memory consumption exceeded the tony_wang ASP .Net 1 11-21-2003 07:28 AM
Urgent! GDI+ Memory consumption Ervin ASP .Net 0 09-15-2003 07:58 PM
aspnet_wp.exe memory consumption Kiran Kumar ASP .Net 1 07-15-2003 12:08 PM



Advertisments