Advice requested for fixing issue 17914

[safety0ff]

On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 01:26:10 UTC, Brian Schott wrote:
>
> I've been reading the Fiber code and (so far) that seems seems 
> to be reasonable. Can anybody think of a reason that this would 
> be a bad idea? I'd rather not create a pull request for a 
> design that's not going to work because of a detail I've 
> overlooked.

Just skimming the Fiber code I found the reset(...) API functions 
whose purpose is to re-use Fibers once they've terminated.

Eager stack deallocation would have to coexist with the Fiber 
reuse API.

Perhaps the Fiber reuse API could simply be polished & made easy 
to integrate so that your original use case no longer hits system 
limits.

I.e. Perhaps an optional delegate could be called upon 
termination, making it easier to hook in Fiber recycling.

The reason my thoughts head in that direction is that I've read 
that mmap/unmmap 'ing frequently isn't recommended in performance 
conscious programs.