12 ms·
There's no confusion at all on my part. The operating system isn't even aware that your application has a heap to begin with. All it knows, is that your program
by astrobe_ 10y ago
There's no confusion at all on my part. The operating system isn't even aware that your application has a heap to begin with. All it knows, is that your program may ask for more memory.
But if you consider a file browser as being part of the OS, I can't help you. You want to adopt a view that profanes have in a technical discussion. That's worse than ignorance.
- binarycrusader 10y agoYou are very confused and quite frankly very wrong. The original claim was the standard library is not part of the OS. However, the standard library is objectively part of the OS on many platforms and so the original claim is factually incorrect. My so-called "view" reflects the industry accepted definition of an OS, so perhaps you should review your suppositions.
- astrobe_ 10y agoOk so name a few of the "OS on many platforms" in which one absolutely can't replace the standard library.
- binarycrusader 10y agoSolaris is one of them, unless you made significant changes to the kernel itself. Darwin, as shipped by Apple is another. There are a variety of embedded OS' that are the same. So yes, as shipped and delivered, you can't replace the standard library and the vendors both consider the standard library as part of the OS. And furthermore, existing application binaries for those platforms would not work without them.