Article View: mod.std.unix
Article #37Re: OPEN_MAX and other constants - are they desireable?
From: Moderator, John Quarterman
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1985 18:05
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1985 18:05
20 lines
1351 bytes
1351 bytes
From: shell!graffiti!peter (Peter da Silva)
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 85 08:01:43 cst
> > ...but it would not work out nearly as well if I had to
> > make that kind of decision at runtime.
> Why not? The penalty is a small increase in the size of the
> binary.
For certain architectures, for instance PDP-11 and 8086 small memory
model, that "small increase" may make the difference between having
the program run or not. There have been all too many programs posted
that are "just a little too big" for the PDP-11 to dismiss this
consideration.
--
Name: Peter da Silva
Graphic: `-_-'
UUCP: ...!shell!{graffiti,baylor}!peter
IAEF: ...!kitty!baylor!peter
Volume-Number: Volume 3, Number 29
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<3591@ut-sally.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!linus!gatech!seismo!ut-sally!std-unixReferences:
<3521@ut-sally.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ut-sally.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!linus!gatech!seismo!ut-sally!std-unix From: std-unix@ut-sally.UUCP (Moderator, John Quarterman) Newsgroups: mod.std.unix Subject: Re: OPEN_MAX and other constants - are they desireable? Message-ID: <3591@ut-sally.UUCP> Date: Wed, 20-Nov-85 13:05:30 EST Article-I.D.: ut-sally.3591 Posted: Wed Nov 20 13:05:30 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 21-Nov-85 22:04:29 EST References: <3521@ut-sally.UUCP> Organization: IEEE/P1003 Portable Operating System Environment Committee Lines: 20 Approved: jsq@ut-sally.UUCP