On Sun, 25 Feb 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > (Assuming OtherBill's message was supposed to go to the list, not just to > me...) > > On Sun, 25 Feb 2001, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > > > At least all of the HAVE_foo_H ones, I'd think. If there's a reasonable > > > chance an APR client will need to do the same autoconf test, we might as > > > well save them the trouble. Header tests pretty easily fall into that > > > category. > > > > I've fat fingered enough code today and have some things I'm trying to > > polish > > up ... anyone who wants to take a crack at it is welcome (starting at apr.h > > and working up, this time ... I had to work down to solve the hosed build, > > which now seems reasonably more stable.) > > I can do this tomorrow if nobody beats me to it. Right now I'm trying to > figure out a respectably clean way to implement bucket reuse lists to cut > down on mallocs/frees.
Quick question on this. How bad is the malloc/free problem now? I agree the empty bucket list is a good thing, just wondering how bad we are doing right now. Ryan _______________________________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] 406 29th St. San Francisco, CA 94131 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
