🚀 go-pugleaf

> >> I contend that in a "modern workstation environment" (e.g., Sun 3/60),
> >> a simple buffer gap method is preferred over both paged buffer gap and
> >> linked line.  I leave it as an excercise for the reader to figure out
> >> why.

> >I'm not sure this is a valid conclusion. If 75K is the optimal file size

> Where did this "75K" figure come from?

I honestly don't remember. It was mentioned by someone in this forum.

I do think, though, that for any given system there is such an optimal size.
It may be that on your workstation that size is measured in megabytes... on
others it may be a few K. I wonder how it feels on a NeXT that's paging over
the network or onto the OD?

> >for a buffer-gap solution, how about paged buffer-gap with 75K pages? Or
> >to add a bit of compromise with some of today's brain-dead architectures
> >perhaps 64K pages would work nearly as well.

> In particular, I have had no trouble editing multi-megabyte files in
> GNU Emacs on a Sun 3/280 w/8 MBytes of memory.

Having "no trouble" with something doesn't mean you have the optimal
solution. Just that you have *a* solution.
-- 
 _--_|\  Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter@ficc.uu.net>.
/      \ Also <peter@ficc.lonestar.org> or <peter@sugar.lonestar.org>
\_.--._/
      v  "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'