[Octave-patch-tracker] [patch #9924] Suggestion for a memory() function

[Markus Mützel]

Follow-up Comment #13, patch #9924 (project octave):

>From the code of memory.m, I was under the impression that
user.RamAvailableAllArrays and syst.PhysicalMemory.Available would always have
the same value.
Do I correctly understand that the value for user.RamAvailableAllArrays will
have to be determined differently in the future?
Maybe we could add that field (possibly with a more Octave-y name) once it is
clear how we can get the corresponding information.

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?9924>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via Savannah
  https://savannah.gnu.org/