Article View: comp.arch
Article #10385Re: Adding fire to the segmentation flamefest...
From: peter da silva
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1991 13:39
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1991 13:39
13 lines
1232 bytes
1232 bytes
In article <1991Apr18.163123.21963@sctc.com>, beede@sctc.com (Mike Beede) writes: > What about two processes that want to share a segment containing > in-segment pointers? Would be pretty nice if the segments didn't have > to be mapped at the same location for both processes, wouldn't it? Well, it'd be a little more convenient I guess. With all that address space, though, you could do what *I* dream of: put all programs into a common address space. This would speed message-passing, and solve all the problems of pointers in shared memory. You would have to deal with non-contiguous address space within a process, but that's a given in this discussion anyway. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' peter@ferranti.com +1 713 274 5180. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<EUWAT74@xds13.ferranti.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!ficc!peterReferences:
<1991Apr18.163123.21963@sctc.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.arch Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) Subject: Re: Adding fire to the segmentation flamefest... Message-ID: <EUWAT74@xds13.ferranti.com> Keywords: segments: do they really suck? Organization: Ferranti International Controls Corporation References: <1991Apr18.163123.21963@sctc.com> Distribution: comp Date: Mon, 22 Apr 91 13:39:09 GMT