Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!batcomputer!cornell!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!henry!hairston From: hairston@henry.ece.cmu.edu (David Hairston) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer Subject: Re: Why does this work? Message-ID: Date: 23 Jan 91 01:01:25 GMT References: <2899.279c25a4@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> Organization: Gaia II Lines: 19 In-reply-to: milikich@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com's message of 22 Jan 91 16:44:34 GMT [milikich@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Mike Milikich, Allen-Bradley Company) writes:] [] As part of a data acquisition app in Think C, I set up a list of blocks [] of memory linked by their handles. Without ever calling MoreMasters (), I [] link up 100 of these things. I did this on purpose at first to make sure I [] knew what the MoreMasters () call would do. Obviously, I don't - the thing [] works fine. [] [] Why can I get 100 handles with calls to NewHandle () ? [...] as i understand it, you never _have_ to call MoreMasters() since the memory manager will allocate (if possible) a new block of master pointers as needed. the reason you _want_ to do this is to keep your memory profile optimized (if that's a concern). remember that each newly allocated block is non-relocatable, so if you know in advance what you'll need (plus an extra margin) you can pre-allocate this space and keep it out of the way. -dave- hairston@henry.ece.cmu.edu