Sometimes, if your computer has memory to spare, allocating more memory will make the program faster. For example, I've read a paper that found that, for a comp

Sometimes, if your computer has memory to spare, allocating more memory will make the program faster. For example, I've read a paper that found that, for a compiler written in C, allocating tree nodes using arenas and deallocating arenas all at once sped up the program at the cost of more memory usage (compared to maintaining a free list). Allocation was quicker because it was usually just a pointer bump, not navigating a linked list, and deallocation was quicker because the arena chunk was marked as free, not individual nodes. I imagine it would be similar with eliminating dynamic allocation vs having it. For example, I assume it would be more performant for an implementation of printf to dynamically allocate space for its result and write a whole line to stdout at once than to, for instance, make a system call to write each byte to stdout while avoiding dynamic allocation. I can't think of any better examples for a bare metal context at the moment, though.