Re: Help (again)

From: Mark A. Heilpern (heilpern@MINDSPRING.COM)
Date: 05/01/98

At 09:52 PM 4/30/98 -0400, you wrote:
>C advantage: cleaner interface, easier to understand
>  disadvantage: slower, doesn't allow transparent snprintf and immediate
>        detection (and prevention) of overruns.
>C++, reverse those above.

Are you saying C++ is faster than C in all cases or only in this
application? (Hopefully you are saying it for some application-
specific reason, because generally speaking, C++ produces
larger and slower code, particularly when the nicer features
such as templates or exception handling are used.)

Thanks to whomever first posed the idea to catch SIGSEGV's and
have them call copyover; great idea, and it seems to work reasonably
well for me so far. I have had a single odd occurance (which was actually
caused by a manual copyover, not a forced one): I had an error writing to
a socket descriptor after rebooting, and got caught in a loop requiring a
kill -9. After less than a few minutes of this, I had a 41 Meg log file

On using shared memory... the calls (shmget(), etc.) seem simple enough
to understand individually, but the combined composition seems a little
nebulous from the manual pages. Does anyone know of example code that
uses these to demonstrate the capabilities? And, are these POSIX compliant
calls, or do I end up with non-portable code?

     | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ:  |
     | |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST