Dnia wtorek, 4 stycznia 2011 o 20:19:55 Dimitar Zhekov napisał(a): > On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 19:43:23 +0100 > Krzysztof Żelechowski <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Dnia wtorek, 4 stycznia 2011 o 18:22:42 Dimitar Zhekov napisał(a): > > > As a crude estimate, under Linux you can try to malloc(minimal > > > presumable required memory). It won't be actually allocated, unless you > > > memset() it or something, but if the result is NULL, a warning is > > > justified. > > > > > > > I do not know where you got it from, but the last OS I know that > > behaved like that was MacOS 7. [cut] > > Like what?..
Like necessarily allocating a contiguous block of physical memory. GNU malloc uses mmap so it is all virtual. > > > malloc fails at 01 << 040 at my place. > > And so? On the machine I'm currently at: kernel 2.6.32, glibc-2.1, > 512MB RAM + 512MB virtual, single malloc fails at ~640MB. > > If by "01 << 040" you mean 4GB, how much real and virtual memory do > you have? > > I have 1 GB of physical memory. (01 << 040) is the first integer that does not fit into unsigned int. Chris _______________________________________________ Geany mailing list [email protected] http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany
