Re: Memory again

[Stefan Monnier]

> Allow me to be naive and ask this: what about compaction?

Lots of work for very little benefit: the memory may not be re-usable by
the OS until Emacs exits, but it *is* reusable by Emacs, so it's largely
a non-problem.

> Would the allocator in use fragment the overall system memory
> space if it frees more aggressively?

We do not care about the "system memory".  It's the OS's job ;-) And no,
Emacs does not "fragment" the system memory (whatever that can mean in
the page-based virtual-memory used by OS es these days) more than other
applications,.

> Nothing like that happened, but I had to restore some of the files as
> it was from a temporary directory. Restoring the directory made emacs
> realize the "file has changed on disk". Is this checked via a hash/checksum
> or does emacs carry along more than that?

If it says "file has changed on disk" it mean the buffer was
still around.


        Stefan