|
|
|
|
|
|
by AshamedCaptain
806 days ago
|
|
|
Mac OS, Win16, PalmOS all have shared heaps too. This is precisely why you need defragmentation (after an application quits, the heap is a fragmented mess, full of holes) and therefore some system so that the other applications keep "movable handles" to heap blocks instead of raw pointers (which would become invalid after the heap undergoes one round of defragmentatino). If an OS does not do this you are basically indirectly setting a limit to its uptime, as eventually this global heap's fragmentation will prevent launching any new programs. Having local heaps does not solve this, as you still have to allocate these local heaps from somewhere. Having an MMU will allow you to do transparent defragmentation without handles as raw pointers (virtual addresses) become your handles. Having an MMU with fixed page size will allow you to outright avoid the need for defragmentation. |
|
|
Mac OS didn’t. It had a system heap and a heap for the running application. Once it supported running multiple applications simultaneously, each of them had its own heap (https://www.folklore.org/Switcher.html: “One fundamental decision was whether or not to load all of the applications into a single heap, which would make optimal use of memory by minimizing fragmentation, or to allocate separate "heap zones" for each application. I decided to opt for separate heap zones to better isolate the applications, but I wasn't sure that was right.”)
That’s why MultiFinder had to know how much RAM to give to each application. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MultiFinder#MultiFinder: “MultiFinder also provides a way for applications to supply their memory requirements ahead of time, so that MultiFinder can allocate a chunk of RAM to each according to need” (Wikipedia doesn’t mention it, but MultiFinder also allowed users to increase those settings)