delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f |
From: | Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de> |
Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Subject: | Re: Trouble of using very large arrays |
Date: | 22 Apr 2004 12:35:44 GMT |
Lines: | 20 |
Message-ID: | <c68e70$96gqq$1@ID-231750.news.uni-berlin.de> |
References: | <c68d6j$g57$03$1 AT news DOT t-online DOT com> |
NNTP-Posting-Host: | ac3b07.physik.rwth-aachen.de (137.226.33.205) |
X-Trace: | news.uni-berlin.de 1082637344 9651034 D 137.226.33.205 ([231750] 10357) |
X-Orig-Path: | not-for-mail |
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong DOT shen AT t-online DOT de> wrote: > I have difficulty in using very large arrays. In a > simple program I could have 'unsigned int a[70000][2]' > without problem but with 'unsigned int a[80000][2]' the > program aborts without even the code being changed to > access the increased new part of the array. Why is > this so? Thanks in advance. You don't provide all the necessary details for anyone to be sure, but this very strongly feels like you're blowing the stack. Don't make large variables like this automatic (i.e. local to some function). The usual recommended solution is to use the heap instead of the stack, i.e. use 'new' or malloc(), depending on what language you're working in, or make such variables static. -- Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de) Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |