Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 00:22:46 -0800 (PST) From: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> To: Arun Sharma <adsharma@c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Setting memory allocators for library functions. Message-ID: <200102270822.f1R8Mkw54670@earth.backplane.com> References: <200102260529.f1Q5T8413011@curve.dellroad.org> <200102261755.f1QHtvr34064@earth.backplane.com> <200102270624.WAA17949@c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:> things work. Then try coding conditionals all the way through to fix
:> it... and don't forget you need to propogate the error condition back
:> up the procedure chain too so the original caller knows why it failed.
:
:So, it all comes down to reimplementing the UNIX kernel in a language
:that supports exceptions, just like Linus suggested :)
:
: -Arun
Not really. UNIX works just fine, it gives you plenty sufficient control
over your environment and you can write your programs pretty much in
whatever language you like. But no amount of OS control will magically
save a badly written program from itself. The best you can hope for is to
reduce the collateral damage by setting appropriate resource limits.
Allowing a program to run the OS itself out of VM, with or without
overcommit, is (being generous) just plain dumb.
-Matt
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200102270822.f1R8Mkw54670>