2 ms·
Are you implying that this ^ 40-year old piece of code is somehow suitable for modern use? A "pointer-per-block" alone will cost you 8 bytes of overhead on 64-
by huhtenberg 9y ago
Are you implying that this ^ 40-year old piece of code is somehow suitable for modern use?
A "pointer-per-block" alone will cost you 8 bytes of overhead on 64-bit machines. Both this and the 'while' loop in 'alloc' can be optimized away with rudimentary slab allocation. There's no threading support, etc.
- fao_ 9y agoYou stated that the example was "overly simplistic and largely optimized". I made no claim as to what system this code is optimized for, I was simply stating that it is possible to have an allocater the same size that is (or was) suitable for production use.