because it will grow the heap on any moderate sized message set, like "all" in a 10000-message inbox?
we pay this cost per-message whenever we're processing a range. fd_set is too large a fixed cost. the pdp11 users who chose "int" for this were trying to do things in a minimalistic way. re: Michael Richardson wrote: >>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Vixie <[email protected]> writes: > Paul> we could replace this with a fixed array of u_char and some > Paul> index-and-shift macros, sort of like "struct fd_set" in > Paul> select(2). in > > Can anyone think of a reason why using fd_set isn't just the right > thing? It is 1024 bits on most systems (256 on others), and a #define > usually lets it get bigger. >
_______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
