On 18 January 2008 08:33, Gunther Nikl wrote: > Kai Henningsen wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 02:46:12PM -0000, Dave Korn wrote: >>> On 16 January 2008 22:09, Diego Novillo wrote: >>> >>>> On 1/16/08 4:16 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>>> >>>>> Because it's not a bug? You're changing the code to silence a false >>>>> negative, which this is what we here in England call "putting the cart >>>>> before the horse." If we clean up all the memory regions on closedown >>>>> we'll be wasting CPU time. And for what? >>>> I agree. Freeing memory right before we exit is a waste of time. >>> So, no gcc without an MMU and virtual memory platform ever again? > > I am sorry Dave, but you are mistaken here.
> Programs directly using Amiga system functions to allocate resources > have to release them back to the system before program end because > AmigaOS on m68k doesn't offer "resource tracking". But the case > discussed here is different: the C runtime tracks allocations done > with standard functions, this includes memory allocations. Thus when > the program exit()s such allocations are freed. Oh, that makes it all fine by me! > I have no idea if 4.3 would run on AmigaOS/m68k though. The port > bitrots since the switch from asm to RTL prologue/epilogue for m68k. Yes, it's been a long time since it was actively maintained. I was concerned that we would end up closing off access to Amiga and any similar flat memory space architectures, but given what you say above I expect we could rely on the C runtime to take care of us anywhere the operating system doesn't. cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today....