> From: Joerg Wunsch [mailto:j...@uriah.heep.sax.de]
> > Currently, the top address will only ever be incremented but never be > fixed downwards in case the entire block at the end of the heap has > been freed up. The cake is a one-way street. ;-) > > Changing this is certainly possible, but unfortunately quite a bit of > work, Ok. I got it. The issue is talking about the case when all the free *heap* (or 'cake' as you put it) is exhausted; but has a malloc'ed & free'd chunk (or realloc'ed) at the end in which case the 'top address'(?) should be allowed to move backwards. > > I'm sorry, but translating texts takes so much time, I'm unable to The original bug description confused me as I had no idea of the context. Thanks for the translation Joerg. > translate you the entire thread. No idea whether having it translated > by Google or Altavista would yield something comprehensible. Although that was the first idea, I don't want to try :) Thanks Anitha _______________________________________________ AVR-libc-dev mailing list AVR-libc-dev@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev
