Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2000
At 23:29 -0500 2000-08-17 (just as I went away), Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: >On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 10:03:32PM +0200, Dominic Dunlop wrote: > > [My stack check patch] didn't get in. Main objection was that the manner > > of establishing available stack space varies widely between platforms > > (and according to whether you're threaded or not). I only did the > >Also, when do you stop upping your stack? When setrlimit() says no >can do more? When you get a signal telling you stop doing that? When >the system starts swapping? When your system admin comes through your >door (and I do mean *through*) demanding to know what the <bleep> you >think you are doing? That's not really a valid objection: firstly, setrlimit's going to stop giving you more stack when it hits whatever hard limit your sysadmin has imposed (so you say ingenuously as said person brushes splinters from their clothing, "But I assumed you would have set a sensible hard limit..."); secondly, Perl (and almost every other program of any complexity) has always felt at liberty to grab as much memory as it can get away with using malloc() (again subject to whatever hard limit may be in force): I don't see that letting it also get greedy via the stack segment makes it any less antisocial than it already is. -- Dominic DunlopThread Previous | Thread Next