Prev: new user safari bookmarks bar
Next: Aperture 3.0.3 out
From: James Jolley on 29 Apr 2010 14:05
Hi folks but andrew and Dan in particular,

How would glulx actually work in a browser from the memory footprint
side? I'm guessing that memory allocation depends on what the browser
will give the plugin, or is it more advanced. I can understand that
ZCode is probably easier to manage with memory, but huge glulx works
using many MB of images might be different. I suppose what I am really
trying to ask is, can a web browser make use of virtual memory in the
same way an interpreter can?

 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: new user safari bookmarks bar
Next: Aperture 3.0.3 out