From: David Powell <dapowell AT usa DOT net>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: use memory more than 1MB
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 23:45:23 +1100
Organization: The University of Melbourne
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <34D079E2.930F0032@usa.net>
References: <01bd26e6$b95daea0$0100007f AT localhost> <34C81A06 DOT 18AF AT cs DOT com> <6ab7ec$qmb$1 AT rosenews DOT rose DOT hp DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: its-tserv5asy37.its.unimelb.edu.au
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk



Andrew Crabtree wrote:

> John M. Aldrich wrote in message <34C81A06 DOT 18AF AT cs DOT com>...
> >You should NEVER put large objects on the stack, particularly not the
> >way you do it here.
> I think depending on background many programmers do just this.  The 'NEVER'
> clause is pretty djgpp specific, not 'C' language specific.  Most unixes
> will grow
> the stack automatically as needed (linux, hpux), and don't have a small
> fixed
> size one like djgpp.
>
> >You can also increase the default stack size, but that is a really
> >horrid way to get the above code to work.
> Sure, for this case it is.  But when porting gnu software that uses alloca
> heavily
> I think increasing stack size is reasonable...
>
> Andy

  Well, sorry if I'm being sensible here, but you could always try making the
array static, so that it goes in the data seg, where all such hideously large
blocks of data belong :-)  Of course, you permanantly waste 1 meg, but if it
has to be temporary then I'd go with malloc, or if you want to be modern then
new....

cya