Re: [PATCH 3/3] Replace slab.c with a very simpleallocator.

[Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>]

On Thu, 2005-02-03 at 11:44 -0800, ultraptr@pacbell.net wrote:
> I wonder what are reasons for this replacement. From outside it looks like
> proven and fast slab allocator is being replaced with slow and new one just
> for sake of size and beauty of source codes?

Yes, that's approximately correct.  Slow, of course, is arguable: it is
possible that the old code was slower, given the setup time and how
infrequently allocations are actually used.  The point here is that it
is quite possible that someone may want to make modifications to the
allocator which will be far simpler on the new code than the old.

In the finest book ever written on computer programming, Kernighan and
Plauger wrote "Don't patch bad code -- rewrite it".  I agree.

Rusty.
-- 
A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver -- Richard Braakman



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl