Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!rochester!quiroz
From: quiroz@lemon.cs.rochester.edu (Cesar Quiroz)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Speed costs (Re: MWC's Coherent - A Lemon...)
Summary: Belief != Evidence
Message-ID: <1990Jun4.134439.27540@cs.rochester.edu>
Date: 4 Jun 90 13:44:39 GMT
References: <3886@darkstar.ucsc.edu> <136369@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <27415@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> <4042@darkstar.ucsc.edu>
Sender: quiroz@cs.rochester.edu (Cesar Quiroz)
Reply-To: quiroz@lemon.cs.rochester.edu (Cesar Quiroz)
Organization: University of Rochester
Lines: 16
In-Reply-To: keller@saturn.ucsc.edu (Jeffrey M. Keller)

In article <4042@darkstar.ucsc.edu>,
   keller@saturn.ucsc.edu (Jeffrey M. Keller) wrote:

| Since i approve of shared libraries, i would like to think that
| the effective cost of the 1.3M (or whatever) dynamically linked
| xclock is <= that of the 376K statically linked one.

I am sure the poster had a better reason to think that 1.3 amounts
to less than 0.376, beyond his approval or not of shared libraries.
It would be a bad time for Computer Science and Engineering if
wishful thinking became an accepted style of argumentation.
-- 
                                      Cesar Augusto Quiroz Gonzalez
                                      Department of Computer Science
                                      University of Rochester
                                      Rochester,  NY 14627