From: kagel AT quasar DOT bloomberg DOT com
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 12:51:00 -0500
Message-Id: <9701231751.AA07263@quasar.bloomberg.com >
To: kagel AT dg1 DOT bloomberg DOT com
Cc: kkunen AT facstaff DOT wisc DOT edu, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To: <9701231632.AA07111@quasar.bloomberg.com > (kagel@quasar)
Subject: Re: Bug report: Structs
Reply-To: kagel AT dg1 DOT bloomberg DOT com

   From: kagel AT quasar
   Errors-To: postmaster AT ns1
   Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:32:17 -0500
   Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
   Reply-To: kagel AT dg1
   Content-Type: text
   Content-Length: 1329

      Errors-To: postmaster AT ns1
      Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:47:31 -0600
      X-Sender: kkunen AT facstaff DOT wisc DOT edu
      Mime-Version: 1.0
      From: kkunen AT facstaff DOT wisc DOT edu (Adam Kunen)
      X-Mailer: <PC Eudora Version 1.4>
      Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
      Content-Length: 930

	      I think this is the right address for bug reports on DOS port of GNU 
      C... But anyway, I was using GNU C and found that when you have a structure 
      bigger than 64k it tends to crash.  Although I havn't spent time to pinpoint 
      exactly what is causing the problem, I beleive that it crashes when you make 
      a function call with a large structure as an argument.  I assume that doing 
      this is okay because gcc doesn't report any warnings or errors, so I've come 
      to the conclusion: It's a bug!
	      I hope this helps,
			      Adam Kunen,
			      kkunen AT facstaff DOT wisc DOT edu




      PS: I was told to give an example code file to illustrate the problem:

      struct FooType {
	      char blah[1024][128];
      };

      void foobar(struct FooType ptr){
	      return;
      }

      int main(void){
	      struct FooType eek;
	      foobar(eek);

   Here is the problem you declare foobar to receive a 'pointer to struct FooType'
   and then pass a 'struct FooType' to it.  Make the previous line:

	foobar( &eek );

   And all will be well.


	      return 0;
      }

My apologies to Adam Kunen and all.  My comment was of course not correct.  I guess
I am just tired or something.  Someone else game the correct advice so I will cut 
this short.

-- 
Art S. Kagel, kagel AT quasar DOT bloomberg DOT com

A proverb is no proverb to you 'till life has illustrated it.  -- John Keats