home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
- Path: sparky!uunet!panther!mothost!merlin.dev.cdx.mot.com!pjd.dev.cdx.mot.com!peterd
- From: peterd@pjd.dev.cdx.mot.com (Peter Desnoyers)
- Subject: Re: Documenting
- Message-ID: <peterd.726243633@pjd.dev.cdx.mot.com>
- Sender: news@merlin.dev.cdx.mot.com (Merlin News System)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: pjd.dev.cdx.mot.com
- Organization: Motorola Codex, Canton, Massachusetts
- References: <C03sAB.MoB@starnine.com> <1992Dec31.112348.12448@sol.ctr.columbia.edu> <C0CsnE.CrC@starnine.com> <C0D1tD.IyH.1@cs.cmu.edu>
- Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 14:20:33 GMT
- Lines: 28
-
- dwp+@cs.cmu.edu (Doug Philips) writes:
-
- >In article <C0CsnE.CrC@starnine.com> mikeh@starnine.com (Mike Haas) writes:
- >+They [screens] are also incredibly wasteful...
- >[Tedious list of the first line "documentation" for a group of screens
- >elided. -dwp]
- >+Simple. Each is in it's own file. Clean, clear, and no waste of space.
-
- >Whoa a minute here. Most OS's (those that have EOL characters), also have
- >file systems with allocations in units of sectors (or multiple-sector
- >unitss), and bunches of tiny files will waste a lot of space. If this is
- >really an issue, then let's be clear about it.
-
- On most UNIX machines, the smallest fragment that can be allocated is
- between 1/2K and 2K. (1/8 to 1/4 of a block, with block size 4K or 8K)
- In addition, some Unix file systems can store tiny files (e.g. <60
- bytes) in the directory entry - i.e. for free. [see the recent
- discussion in comp.os.linux.]
-
- Screens are *not* more efficient with regards to storage than file
- systems.
-
- [besides, I go batty trying to work on a 24-line display, never mind
- 16 lines. 65 lines is what fits on a sheet of paper, and it's what god
- meant us to read code in chunks of :-)]
-
- Peter Desnoyers
- --
-