From xemacs-m  Tue Mar 18 18:31:27 1997
Received: from sym.primuscorp.com (root@[207.14.28.20])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA17445
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 18:31:25 -0600 (CST)
Received: from horus (horus.primuscorp.com [198.187.136.23]) by sym.primuscorp.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id QAA01380 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 16:29:57 -0800
Received: from roy by horus (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id QAA16159; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 16:29:37 -0800
Received: by roy (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id QAA14028; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 16:29:42 -0800
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 16:29:42 -0800
Message-Id: <199703190029.QAA14028@roy>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Damon Lipparelli <lipp@primus.com>
To: XEmacs Beta Mailing List <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>
Subject: relocating allocator?
Reply-To: Damon Lipparelli <lipp@primus.com>
Organization: Primus Communications Corporation
X-Mailer: VM 6.19 [ XEmacs 20.1 (beta8) ]

Does anyone remember the consensus on whether or not rel-alloc is a good
idea?  I seem to recall it being suspected for some crashes and performance 
problems, but I can't find a specific message.

Thanks,
-lipp

---

Yow!  STYROFOAM..

