From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,be7fa91648ac3f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!enst.fr!melchior!cuivre.fr.eu.org!melchior.frmug.org!not-for-mail From: "Alexander E. Kopilovich" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Large arrays (again), problem case for GNAT Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 05:11:56 +0400 (MSD) Organization: Cuivre, Argent, Or Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lovelace.ada-france.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org 1113441552 58217 212.85.156.195 (14 Apr 2005 01:19:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 01:19:11 +0000 (UTC) To: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org Return-Path: In-Reply-To: ; from Robert A Duff at 13 Apr 2005 20:16:21 -0400 X-Mailer: Mail/@ [v2.45 MSDOS] X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at ada-france.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Gateway to the comp.lang.ada Usenet newsgroup" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Original-Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10444 Date: 2005-04-14T05:11:56+04:00 Robert A Duff wrote; > "(see below)" writes: > > > I see that Adrian is using Linux. > > Is Linux not notorious for problems of this kind? > > > > I seem to remember that it has some kind of optimistic allocator > that can grant a memory allocation request, only for it to fail > when you try to use the memory you appear to have been granted. > >... > > I'm not sure why you say "notorious". It seems to me that > allocate-on-write is desirable. So, what is the meaning of malloc call with this approach? In which court (somewhere in Linux or outside) I should defend my right to use the memory, which I legally requested by malloc, was granted, and then deprived of it?