From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from smtp3.fas.harvard.edu ([140.247.30.83]) by hawkwind.utcs.utoronto.ca with SMTP id <24790>; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 02:23:06 -0500
Received: from p9rsc.cs.bell-labs.com (rcox-2.student.harvard.edu [140.247.183.206]) by smtp3.fas.harvard.edu with SMTP id LAA19961; Wed, 15 Dec 1999 11:32:27 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199912151632.LAA19961@smtp3.fas.harvard.edu>
From:	"Russ Cox" <rsc@plan9.bell-labs.com>
Subject: Re: rc futures
Date:	Wed, 15 Dec 1999 11:32:27 -0500
To:	rc@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> 23. Dynamically load readline only when rc is about to read from a
> terminal device.  This would mean that a single rc binary would be
> lean and fast for scripts, but still do readline for interactive use.
> However, I suspect that the effort involved in making this happen
> portably would be considerable.

What operating system doesn't demand-load the binaries anyway?
If you're not using the readline code, (the large majority of) it won't
be resident in memory.

And furthermore surely your OS is sharing text pages, so as long
as there is one rc binary running on a terminal, you've already got
it loaded and there's no penalty for running more or for running
scripts.

As Byron said, the mind boggles.

Russ