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;)

Reply via email to