Re: [S] ... Version 3 to Version 4 Comparison s of Splus

Duncan Murdoch (dmurdoch@pair.com)
Tue, 31 Mar 1998 18:23:12 GMT


On Tue, 31 Mar 1998 09:49:46 -0600, "Humbolt, Allen"
<HumboltA@kochind.com> wrote:

>I've been surprised to hear complaints in snews about the speed of
>Version 4. The complaints I hear at Koch involve stability.
>Splus/Windows V4 almost never crashes for me; so I've got to believe
>that the stability complaints either involve menus (which I seldom use)
>or are the result of new users telling Splus to do silly things.

My guess is that the stability is related to sloppy programming, which
assumes that resources are infinite. You were running with 64MB ram;
I think that makes it more stable than when run on 32MB (and even more
so than on my under-powered laptop with 16MB).

For example, when run on a 32MB machine, it seems reasonably stable:
as long as I don't start another resource hungry program first. If I
do, then V4 won't even start at all, it dies with what looks like a
Nil pointer access to me, probably because it tried to allocate some
memory, the allocation failed, but it assumed it would succeed.

The strange thing is that I've got a lot of free disk space dedicated
to a large swap file, so it's not as though I'm out of virtual memory.
SPlus is just doing something that requires physical memory, which I
don't have a lot of.

Duncan Murdoch
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This message was distributed by s-news@wubios.wustl.edu. To unsubscribe
send e-mail to s-news-request@wubios.wustl.edu with the BODY of the
message: unsubscribe s-news