Side note.

Post #18,441 by inthane-chan 11/15/01 2:48:31 PM Reply	Side note. Somebody is going to get killed because their architecture barely runs on computers with 512mb of memory. I think you can figure out who I'm talking about. "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Post #18,443 by admin 11/15/01 3:10:53 PM Reply	Muah. Who else loves it when Thane posts a "side note" to a discussion about "them"...? ;-) Regards, -scott anderson
Post #18,455 by CRConrad 11/15/01 4:57:41 PM Reply	Moi, for one.
Post #18,507 by static 11/15/01 11:56:24 PM Reply	Is most amusing. "All around me are nothing but fakes Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"
Post #18,538 by neelk 11/16/01 9:54:41 AM Reply	I don't get it... Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how .NET could need 512 megs of RAM. The worst-case I can think of is if you move to IA64 (doubling memory usage because of the doubling of pointer size), and then the garbage collector is tuned shamefully badly (again doubling memory usage). Together that would take a system needing 128 MB to 512 MB. But I don't think that IA32 is going to die for a few more years yet, and I'd expect a great deal of interest in tuning gc performance since memory locality is so critical to decent software performance. What am I missing?
Post #18,547 by inthane-chan 11/16/01 11:33:48 AM Reply	I don't get it either. I'm just reporting what I'm hearing here. I honestly am not doing much work with the subject. The words "managed code" keep getting bandied about when asked why. "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Post #18,552 by ChrisR 11/16/01 12:26:49 PM Reply	Kitchen sink... As with all things MS, they like to bundle everything together. The .net VM probably doesn't require much memory, but when you pile on all the libraries, utilities, features, etc... you probably end up with .net having everything from a browser, a media player, photographic development, etc... I'm sure they're ready to go on record as saying that all these peripheral features are a core part of .net and can not be removed.
Post #18,611 by static 11/16/01 11:42:41 PM Reply	I bet it's issues with the Virtual Machine. I suspect there are two distinct issues. The first is that when you have a language designed to target a virtual machine, which is what C# is, then efforts to compile it all the way to assembly can result in bloated code. If the compiler doesn't get a lot of use by the great unwashed, then the compilation step probably needs optimizing anyway. Icon suffers from both halves of this problem. The second issue is that Microsoft's C compilers don't produce wonderfully compact assembly. Now, my observations are from several years ago, remember, but the amount of compiler cruft at the start and end of a procedure in assembly was quite amazing. And it was worse because it was in Windows. Coupled with the fact that Microsoft applications seem to be Very Large for their function, well, now we have a situation. Wade. "All around me are nothing but fakes Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"

Welcome to IWETHEY!