Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!bionet!agate!pasteur!cory.Berkeley.EDU!navas
From: navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: A REAL fork() function (was Re: SKsh weirdness)
Message-ID: <22496@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 28 Feb 90 20:16:03 GMT
References: <DEVEN.90Feb22133919@netserv2.rpi.edu> <13920050@hpfelg.HP.COM>
Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (David C. Navas)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 13

In article <13920050@hpfelg.HP.COM> koren@hpfelg.HP.COM (Steve Koren) writes:
>PS - I did some emperical tests, and Lattice's malloc() is significantly
>faster than AllocMem() (in addition to being standard).  It only matters
>if you do alot of dynamic allocation, which SKsh does.

Does anyone else find this wierd?  I would suspect that malloc() is CALLING
AllocMem()...  Steve, are you telling AllocMem to clear your allocations?
[via MEMF_CLEAR]??  This would, of course, be more like calloc(), wouldn't
it?
:)

David Navas                                   navas@cory.berkeley.edu
"Think you can, think you can't -- either way it's true."  Henry Ford