On Jul 9, 2013, at 9:10 AM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8 July 2013 22:43, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi,
Igor, please get this point of view out of your system :).
First, not all programming languages are like this: You can easily run other VMs (e.g., Java) with more than 3 GB. But, let's not even go there: I can run Pharo with 1Gb on Mac without problems. According to your reasoning we might end up downgrading the Mac VM. Some data does not fit in memory, but if I can get all my data in my image, I will choose to do it.
I am not saying that we should compare with Java, or that it is the end of the world that the Windows VM is highly restricted. I am simply saying that we should not dismiss this as a problem just because we do not know how, or do not have the resources to solve it right now.
After all, we are here to change the world :).
Yes, but this topic was raised multiple times already. Maybe we should stop wasting time on it?
All you need to do, to change the limit, go to platforms/win32/vm/sqWin32Alloc.h
And change this:
#ifndef MAX_VIRTUAL_MEMORY #define MAX_VIRTUAL_MEMORY 512*1024*1024 #endif
So, if you want more, build VM with any limit you see fit. But there's a reason why in official VM its 512.
Which reason? (It is a real question, I do not remember why it is so low) Esteban
Cheers, Doru
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.