Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!spool.mu.edu!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!psuvax1!rutgers!cbmvax!peter
From: peter@cbmvax.commodore.com (Peter Cherna)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re: Memory fragging
Message-ID: <21838@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 23 May 91 14:50:44 GMT
References: <1991May21.195251.16477@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <21795@cbmvax.commodore.com> <1991May23.114423.11039@medar.com>
Reply-To: peter@cbmvax.commodore.com (Peter Cherna)
Organization: Commodore-Amiga, Inc.  West Chester, PA.
Lines: 17

In article <1991May23.114423.11039@medar.com> jseymour@medar.com (James Seymour) writes:
>But if you eventually F/free() the other two, the three chunks of memory
>(in the above example) will be coalesced by the o/s, won't they?

I'm not a fragging expert, but I've always assumed the system was
happier if you tried to free things in reverse order.  (Intervening
processes may make allocations.)  It's also a generally good programming
practice.

>Jim Seymour				| Medar, Inc.

     Peter
--
Peter Cherna, Operating Systems Development Group, Commodore-Amiga, Inc.
{uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!peter    peter@cbmvax.commodore.com
My opinions do not necessarily represent the opinions of my employer.
"If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."