Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!mit-eddie!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!uwmcsd1!vanvleck!uwvax!umn-d-ub!umn-cs!ns!ddb
From: ddb@ns.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Partial application in C
Summary: unmodif_ied_, not unodif_iable_
Message-ID: <291@ns.nsc.com>
Date: 30 Jun 88 16:35:30 GMT
References: <509@philmds.UUCP> <3950006@hplvly.HP.COM>
Organization: Network Systems Corp. Mpls MN
Lines: 12

In article <3950006@hplvly.HP.COM>, boyne@hplvly.HP.COM (Art Boyne) writes:
> ...on virtual memory machines,
> ...Having
> unmodifiable code segments therefore reduces disk activity.
  No, it's whether the code segments *ACTUALLY ARE* modified that should
control disk activity; any decent virtual memory system must be able to 
determine if a writable page has actually been written!  So, truly pure
code does reduce paging, but the ABILITY to have impure code shouldn't
cost anything unless it's used.
-- 
                  -- David Dyer-Bennet
		     Fidonet 1:282/341.0