From:	Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: break - problem
Date:	27 Aug 2003 17:38:59 GMT
Organization:	Aachen University of Technology (RWTH)
Lines:	22
Message-ID:	<biiqbj$a9s$1@nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE>
References:	<bii4nn$fij$1 AT nets3 DOT rz DOT RWTH-Aachen DOT DE> <20030827131140 DOT 18495 DOT 00000019 AT mb-m13 DOT aol DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	acp3bf.physik.rwth-aachen.de
X-Trace:	nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE 1062005939 10556 137.226.32.75 (27 Aug 2003 17:38:59 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT rwth-aachen DOT de
NNTP-Posting-Date:	27 Aug 2003 17:38:59 GMT
Originator:	broeker@
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Sterten <sterten AT aol DOT com> wrote:
> Without break the program runs fine.

So what?  As I said: reproduce the problem inside a debugger, i.e. *do*
hit Ctrl-C while it's running, and see what happens.

> I had lots of GPFs with earlier versions of AOL under WIN31 , and
> I'm pretty sure that these did depend on the size of some AOL-files
> , it became better when I received more emails until another limit
> (64K?)  was reached.

So what?  What's the behaviour of AOL's stuff on a way outdated system
supposed to have to do with the behaviour of this program you wrote
yourself, on a different computer, different operating system, and
quite certainly a different compiler?

> It's  similar with this GCC-  program  now.

Not nearly as similar as you seem to believe.
-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.

- Raw text -