On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Vitaliy wrote: > Of course you have to be careful when using dynamic memory allocation, but > you can't just assume that if you use it you will have memory leaks, memory > unbalancing problems, and "big and hardly recoverable problem". You don't > need malloc() to write buggy code. > I agree with that. All I am saying is when the memory allocation mapping collapses youor entire system crashes, while if only a piece of memory is corrupted the system might survive. BTW to determine buffer overrun problems is also easier if the corruption happens at a deterministic memory space -- as then you can put a break on memory write on it if the emulator supports that or even to put a marker block to the specific address that a debugging logic could check from time to time. Anyway, I am pretty sure there ar emany situations where it is easier to approach the problem with a dynamic allocation strategy, and even there are situations when a garbage colletor memory handler is even more easier for the developer. What I arguing with if we can assume that there are situations whcih is technically impossible to describe with the static allocation. I think what Isaac meant is that if your application doesn't have enough > memory to do what it needs to do, you should get a chip with more RAM! > It depends. If it saves more money on the development phase than the smaller device would do on the production, then I agree with you on this. Tamas > > Vitaliy > > -- > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > -- http://www.mcuhobby.com -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist