[racket] DrRacket never uses more than 1 GB?

On Jul 14, Greg Hendershott wrote:
> [4] More memory debugging tools would be helpful, as it's
> non-trivial to correlate Racket data to bytes (e.g. no C-style
> sizeof).

About this point: there's `current-memory-use', which can provide you
with a rough number, so you can allocate some N whatevers, then use it
again and check out the difference.  It's no replacement for a memory
debugging tool, but I think that it covers the "sizeof dept".  (Which
is itself not too well defined in case of pointers and a structures
that make up an arbitrary pointer graph.)

-- 
          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!