A different kind of Walter? :-)

[Lionello Lunesu]

"Dan" <murpsoft at hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:f0b16i$2k5p$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Sean Kelly Wrote:
>> Lionello Lunesu wrote:
>> > I don't care if there address changes, just as long as there's no data 
>> > being
>> > copied physically. I mean, a block of continuous memory might already 
>> > be
>> > all-over-the-place in physical memory. That's what I want: a 
>> > VirtualRealloc
>> > that returns the address of a new virtual memory block, but which is 
>> > using
>> > the same physical memory.. 'Free' array resizes, surely this is worth
>> > something!
>>
>> Hm, assuming there is nothing else of the page(s) but the data to move,
>> it should be possible to do so without explicit copying.  I have no idea
>> is VirtualAlloc can do this, but it's definitely possible.
>
> Oh my!
>
> On the x86, this sort of implementation would slaughter your performance,
> as you'd get massive numbers of cache and page misses.

Is a cache using virtual addresses or physical addresses?

> You could theoretically implement a system on the x86 that would 
> virtualize memory locations arbitrarily, but.... ewww...
>

Isn't this what's happening already?

L.