I read this same principle in an arch or gentoo forum/manual. I can’t even think of an argument against it tho? Unused anything is wasted by definition isn’t it? I know I’m missing something obvious somehow
The problem with the simplified phrase is that your computer is expected to run more than one program at a time.
If you are only running one program, it should certainly use all the RAM of your system.
However, your desktop, laptop, phone, tablet, game console, etc. all run hundreds or thousands of programs at the same time. Each individual application should optimize RAM usage so the whole system can work together.
Another commenter in the chain talks about disk caching, which is what the phrase “unused ram is wasted ram” came from
It’s been coopted by application programmers who don’t want to optimize their software
Can we try a different example or a declarative statement that negates my implied claim that in any case where a thing is unused, it must be categorized as waste by definition? The previous questions seem obviously clarifying of nothing. I know they’re probably clarifying once your point is known, but because the point remains unknown to me, I can only perceive them as empty Socratic dialogue? I know it’s not, I’m just trying to express more definitively how confused I’m getting lol
I read this same principle in an arch or gentoo forum/manual. I can’t even think of an argument against it tho? Unused anything is wasted by definition isn’t it? I know I’m missing something obvious somehow
The problem with the simplified phrase is that your computer is expected to run more than one program at a time.
If you are only running one program, it should certainly use all the RAM of your system.
However, your desktop, laptop, phone, tablet, game console, etc. all run hundreds or thousands of programs at the same time. Each individual application should optimize RAM usage so the whole system can work together.
Another commenter in the chain talks about disk caching, which is what the phrase “unused ram is wasted ram” came from
It’s been coopted by application programmers who don’t want to optimize their software
Well, e. g. unused weapon is not really waste, is it?
what? yes, an unused weapon is still a wasted weapon. I know I’m missing something tho
Maybe it is a wasted weapon, but is it really a waste? Can weapon be considered wasted?
Can we try a different example or a declarative statement that negates my implied claim that in any case where a thing is unused, it must be categorized as waste by definition? The previous questions seem obviously clarifying of nothing. I know they’re probably clarifying once your point is known, but because the point remains unknown to me, I can only perceive them as empty Socratic dialogue? I know it’s not, I’m just trying to express more definitively how confused I’m getting lol