Xref: utzoo comp.bugs.4bsd:1709 comp.lang.c:35732 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!olivea!tymix!cirrusl!sunstorm!dhesi From: dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) Newsgroups: comp.bugs.4bsd,comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Complexity of reallocating storage (was users command crap) Message-ID: <2924@cirrusl.UUCP> Date: 2 Feb 91 22:47:36 GMT References: <6662@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> <15325:Jan2903:19:4991@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <21548@yunexus.YorkU.CA> <5883:Feb102:05:4991@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> Sender: news@cirrusl.UUCP Organization: Cirrus Logic Inc. Lines: 16 In <5883:Feb102:05:4991@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes: >Tradeoffs between ``multiple passes'' and ``single pass'' are entirely >irrelevant when they aren't reflected in speed, space, or human effort. It's often easier to adapt a single-pass program to handle previously-unforeseen needs than to similarly adapt a multipass program. A good example is what happens if you decide later that you would like to handle standard input. Now if you have a multipass implementation, you either have to completely redo it, or use a possibly huge temp file, or do buffering in blocks which may involve a heavy penalty in speed and memory usage. -- Rahul Dhesi UUCP: oliveb!cirrusl!dhesi