This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
This article needs to be generalized to include memory managers used in systems with automatic garbage collection. Also, the detailed explanation of the memory management interfaces for C and C++ should either be removed, or moved to a subsection.-- Doug Bell ( talk/ contrib) 10:04, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I believe the (nothrow) variants of new, new[], delete, delete[] are non-standard, but I cannot find much info on them anyway besides MSDN. Someone who is more knowledgeable should clarify the sentence or remove those functions. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
80.131.229.247 (
talk) 20:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
We have :
Shouldn't we put an end to the 20+ years of suffering and lump these all into one article, instead of giving several partially overlapping and contradictory explanations customized to each of these concepts? One weeps for the trees that have died for printed explanations of all this. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 00:36, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Whoa, merge half a dozen or more articles? Sounds a bit too ambitious. I'd start with just merging two. There is some overlap between this article and Expanded memory. I suggest a manual edit to weave non-redundant content on this page into that one, then this page could become a redirect to Expanded memory. Right now, Expanded memory manager actually redirects to that page, not this one.
I think what would be nice to make sense of all of these somewhat complicated memory schemes would be to create a new article titled, perhaps, "History (or timeline) of x86 DOS memory solutions". For someone too young to remember the era, or who was mostly on mainframes at the time (like myself) it would be helpful. I've contributed to the article Timeline of x86 DOS operating systems, read that for starters (still a work in progress). Here's what I have so far in a nutshell:
1. IBM PC and PC/XT w/ 640K are all there is and DOS memory management is fairly clean 2. PC/AT (286) introduces extended memory but only for RAM disks (not used much, I think) and uses a BIOS service to avoid switching to protected mode 3. Intel produces an expansion card so Lotus 1-2-3 can have bigger spreadsheets, uses expanded memory bank switching so it will run on 8086/8088 as well as 286, drivers supplied by board manufacturer 4. MS-DOS 3.2 adds RAMDRIVE.SYS driver, supports RAM drives in expanded memory 5. Compaq Deskpro 386 has built-in hardware support for expanded memory, no expansion card needed 6. Phar Lap introduces first 386 DOS extender to use extended memory (but it's buggy) 7. Compaq DOS 3.31 introduces first (386) expanded memory manager which uses software to simulate expanded memory using extended memory. 8. IBM finally supports expanded memory (DOS 4.0), but new version is buggy (paging problems) 9. Microsoft uses bank switching (expanded memory) for early versions of Windows 10. Lotus 1-2-3 release 3 uses extended memory via a VCPI-compatible 16-bit 80286 extender 11. DR-DOS 5.0 includes the MemoryMax "memory manager", the first memory management system to allow loading TSRs, device drivers and the operating system into upper memory blocks, and the operating system to be loaded into the high memory area. 12. Windows 3.0 supports DPMI, first widely adopted Windows, developers start writing for Windows instead of DOS, to avoid memory management issues. This article is mostly about items 7 and 11 on the above list.
64.128.111.166 ( talk) 01:46, 27 February 2011 (UTC) 64.128.111.166 ( talk) 16:49, 28 February 2011 (UTC) 99.168.79.236 ( talk) 05:09, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
they usually refer to how it looks, but I couldn't help notice that Windows memory management is red link. Since I can't even add the following informative (and mildly amusing) talks to any article-space page, I'm gonna list them here:
HTH. JMP EAX ( talk) 18:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
And for Win8 there's this, which could probably go in one of the articles dedicated to Metro apps. JMP EAX ( talk) 18:45, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Global EMM Import Specification redirects to this article. But the term is not mentioned in the article at all. What is it? -- RokerHRO ( talk) 09:09, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Can we get rid of the binary prefixes (mebibytes, etc) scattered throughout this article? No reference materials written about the PC architecture in its contemporary development ever used these, and they don't make sense used in this article. Denverite ( talk) 16:54, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
This article needs to be generalized to include memory managers used in systems with automatic garbage collection. Also, the detailed explanation of the memory management interfaces for C and C++ should either be removed, or moved to a subsection.-- Doug Bell ( talk/ contrib) 10:04, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I believe the (nothrow) variants of new, new[], delete, delete[] are non-standard, but I cannot find much info on them anyway besides MSDN. Someone who is more knowledgeable should clarify the sentence or remove those functions. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
80.131.229.247 (
talk) 20:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
We have :
Shouldn't we put an end to the 20+ years of suffering and lump these all into one article, instead of giving several partially overlapping and contradictory explanations customized to each of these concepts? One weeps for the trees that have died for printed explanations of all this. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 00:36, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Whoa, merge half a dozen or more articles? Sounds a bit too ambitious. I'd start with just merging two. There is some overlap between this article and Expanded memory. I suggest a manual edit to weave non-redundant content on this page into that one, then this page could become a redirect to Expanded memory. Right now, Expanded memory manager actually redirects to that page, not this one.
I think what would be nice to make sense of all of these somewhat complicated memory schemes would be to create a new article titled, perhaps, "History (or timeline) of x86 DOS memory solutions". For someone too young to remember the era, or who was mostly on mainframes at the time (like myself) it would be helpful. I've contributed to the article Timeline of x86 DOS operating systems, read that for starters (still a work in progress). Here's what I have so far in a nutshell:
1. IBM PC and PC/XT w/ 640K are all there is and DOS memory management is fairly clean 2. PC/AT (286) introduces extended memory but only for RAM disks (not used much, I think) and uses a BIOS service to avoid switching to protected mode 3. Intel produces an expansion card so Lotus 1-2-3 can have bigger spreadsheets, uses expanded memory bank switching so it will run on 8086/8088 as well as 286, drivers supplied by board manufacturer 4. MS-DOS 3.2 adds RAMDRIVE.SYS driver, supports RAM drives in expanded memory 5. Compaq Deskpro 386 has built-in hardware support for expanded memory, no expansion card needed 6. Phar Lap introduces first 386 DOS extender to use extended memory (but it's buggy) 7. Compaq DOS 3.31 introduces first (386) expanded memory manager which uses software to simulate expanded memory using extended memory. 8. IBM finally supports expanded memory (DOS 4.0), but new version is buggy (paging problems) 9. Microsoft uses bank switching (expanded memory) for early versions of Windows 10. Lotus 1-2-3 release 3 uses extended memory via a VCPI-compatible 16-bit 80286 extender 11. DR-DOS 5.0 includes the MemoryMax "memory manager", the first memory management system to allow loading TSRs, device drivers and the operating system into upper memory blocks, and the operating system to be loaded into the high memory area. 12. Windows 3.0 supports DPMI, first widely adopted Windows, developers start writing for Windows instead of DOS, to avoid memory management issues. This article is mostly about items 7 and 11 on the above list.
64.128.111.166 ( talk) 01:46, 27 February 2011 (UTC) 64.128.111.166 ( talk) 16:49, 28 February 2011 (UTC) 99.168.79.236 ( talk) 05:09, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
they usually refer to how it looks, but I couldn't help notice that Windows memory management is red link. Since I can't even add the following informative (and mildly amusing) talks to any article-space page, I'm gonna list them here:
HTH. JMP EAX ( talk) 18:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
And for Win8 there's this, which could probably go in one of the articles dedicated to Metro apps. JMP EAX ( talk) 18:45, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Global EMM Import Specification redirects to this article. But the term is not mentioned in the article at all. What is it? -- RokerHRO ( talk) 09:09, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Can we get rid of the binary prefixes (mebibytes, etc) scattered throughout this article? No reference materials written about the PC architecture in its contemporary development ever used these, and they don't make sense used in this article. Denverite ( talk) 16:54, 25 December 2015 (UTC)