From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Static in 9X
Date: 16 Sep 1994 23:13:59 -0400
Date: 1994-09-16T23:13:59-04:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <35dmtn$3ub@gnat.cs.nyu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 940916030323_73672.2025_DHR67-3@CompuServe.COM
"Our vendor decides whether or not to put objects in ROM via the definition of
static (in part). We're trying to get better performance in this area for
composite objects."
Have a little chat with your vendor. We are talking 9X here right? It is
clear that preelaborability should be the issue (see the systems
programming annexe). Whether something is static should have nothing
whatever to do with whether things are static.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1994-09-17 3:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1994-09-16 3:03 Static in 9X Ken Garlington
1994-09-17 3:13 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1994-09-19 23:40 Ken Garlington
[not found] <940914130023_73672.2025_DHR31-2@compuserve.com>
1994-09-15 15:05 ` Tucker Taft
1994-09-16 10:26 ` Tucker Taft
1994-09-14 13:00 Ken Garlington
1994-09-15 13:37 ` Robert Dewar
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox