al@well.sf.ca.us (Alfred Fontes) (02/21/91)
I was wondering how people out there are handling the memory situation. My own method is to overload ::operator new() and lock the segment for as long as I'm using it. I have the luxury of not worrying about real mode. I would like to know if other people are doing the same thing. If so, how are you implementing new()?
mwizard@eecs.cs.pdx.edu (Craig Nelson) (02/22/91)
al@well.sf.ca.us (Alfred Fontes) writes: >I was wondering how people out there are handling the memory situation. My >own method is to overload ::operator new() and lock the segment >for as long as I'm using it. I have the luxury of not worrying about >real mode. >I would like to know if other people are doing the same thing. If so, how >are you implementing new()? Well, I don't know about the rest of the world, but I prefer working on 386 programs where extended memory is taken advantage of. The library routines I use come directly from MicroSoft, called XMM.LIB, and every time I need a chunk of memory and don't want to drop the heap I just call for more. Of course I check for availability, but thats beside the point. By the way, all this is done in the new() operator overload. I am working on the extra library routines to make it a permanent portion of the C++ library through inheritance. Craig (mwizard@eecs.ee.pdx.edu)