From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26753 invoked by alias); 20 Sep 2002 23:48:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26746 invoked from network); 20 Sep 2002 23:48:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jackfruit.Stanford.EDU) (171.64.38.136) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Sep 2002 23:48:28 -0000 Received: (from carlton@localhost) by jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g8KNmHT24780; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 16:48:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: jackfruit.Stanford.EDU: carlton set sender to carlton@math.stanford.edu using -f To: Kevin Buettner Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb Subject: Re: xmmalloc? References: <20020920231602.GA4807@nevyn.them.org> <1020920233340.ZM27766@localhost.localdomain> From: David Carlton Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 16:48:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1020920233340.ZM27766@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00330.txt.bz2 On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 16:33:41 -0700, Kevin Buettner said: > On Sep 20, 7:16pm, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >> Otherwise, should we just remove [xmmalloc] entirely? > If no one makes a convincing case for it, I think it should be > removed. That's what I was hoping y'all would say! I'd be happy to volunteer to remove it if the consensus turns out to be that that would be a good idea. Not that I don't like adding new code to software, mind you, but deleting code has its undeniable pleasures... David Carlton carlton@math.stanford.edu