Glenn Fowler wrote: > On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 19:46:45 +0100 Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: > > >On 10/30/06, Roland Mainz <roland.mainz at nrubsig.org> wrote: > > >> Attached is a small patch ("ksh93_libcmd_killglobalvars001.diff.txt") > > >> for ast-ksh.2006-09-12 which significantly reduces the size of the > > >> global variables in libcmd > > >Why do you think the global variable size needs to be reduced? Is > > >there anything especially bad when a program uses global variables? [snip] > I believe the complaint about these globals is the .bss taken up by > the aggregate dll/so
Yes, that's one of the reasons - see my other email (http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss/2006-October/001631.html) for the other reasons. For example at least on UltraSPARC+SPARC64 it is possible to do some nice optimisations (like using a larger page size for stack pages) when data are stored in the stack instead of using global data... ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)