Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!endor!singer
From: singer@endor.harvard.edu (Richard Siegel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Possible LSC improvements
Message-ID: <2986@husc6.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 13-Oct-87 09:37:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: husc6.2986
Posted: Tue Oct 13 09:37:51 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 14-Oct-87 06:47:41 EDT
References: <2071@sfsup.UUCP| <170026@acf3.NYU.EDU>
Sender: news@husc6.UUCP
Reply-To: singer@endor.UUCP (Richard Siegel)
Organization: THINK Technologies, Inc., Bedford, MA
Lines: 23

My personal preference is not to use a cache; crashing doesn't worry me
because I always save my source files before I run. What worries me is
that a bad pointer could possibly corrupt the cache without crashing the
machine, and cause garbage to be written out to disk when the cache is flushed.
I don't know if that's a valid worry, but I prefer not to use the cache.

The user can tell if the cache is turned on, and I suppose LightspeedC
could detect whether it's turned on, but it's impossible to know *where*
above BufPtr the cache is. Very often the cache isn't the only thing in 
high memory.

It's an interesting idea, but it's not likely to get much consideration
at the moment...

	--Rich


**The opinions stated herein are my own opinions and do not necessarily
represent the policies or opinions of my employer (THINK Technologies, Inc).

* Richard M. Siegel | {decvax, ucbvax, sun}!harvard!endor!singer    *
* Customer Support  | singer@endor.harvard.edu			    *
* THINK Technologies, Inc.  (No snappy quote)                       *