From: MobyGamer@gmail.com   
      
   As the subject says.  Since MS-DOS ever since version 2.0 has memory   
   management functions (INT 21h/AH=48h, INT 21h/AH=49h, and INT 21h/AH=4Ah), why   
   did Borland feel it necessary to implement their own heap manager?   
      
   The only possible reason I can think of is that Borland's management only uses   
   8 bytes of overhead instead of DOS's 16 bytes per overhead (per MCB), so I   
   guess the advantage was that you could use 8 less bytes per allocation, and   
   also allow a minimum    
   allocation of 8 bytes instead of DOS's 16 bytes.  The thing is, the heap   
   manager compiles to nearly 1K, so it seems like this would have eaten up any   
   savings gained by a smaller heap structure...?  Any thoughts or comments   
   welcome.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)