X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From: Bernd Becker <munin AT munin DOT inka DOT de>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: GPP 3.04: unknown (to me) error in crash log
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 02:36:32 +0200
Organization: (Posted via) INKA e.V. http://www.inka.de/
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <7qpmbu0tee5o0eg10l5drtd33rkcgvqd0r@4ax.com>
References: <n33gbug7s08o8lh8chokjrv4rtjv7849rq AT 4ax DOT com> <7680-Sat13Apr2002211933+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <cvugbuohjq6c4qqn46fpir7a8v6ikss21s AT 4ax DOT com> <2927-Sun14Apr2002065236+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <muejbu0q7l4e2s57sdkokclabnh7b1i2es AT 4ax DOT com> <6551-Sun14Apr2002213144+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cccxi.yapay.inka.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: sapa.inka.de 1018917422 4413 212.227.15.185 (16 Apr 2002 00:37:02 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: newsmaster AT inka DOT de
NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Apr 2002 00:37:02 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

On Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:31:45 +0300, "Eli Zaretskii"
<eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote:

>You used the phrase "error message", but the line that mentions
>'___cxa_bad_typeid':
>
>  0x0006f8ce ___cxa_bad_typeid+1394
>
>doesn't look as an error message.  That's why I thought you were
>talking about the crash message, which does look like error message:
To me, it looks like a error message, and I did mention that I
searched for information about '___cxa_bad_typeid' and not a GPF
message; it's the 'bad' part that makes me think of it as an error
message because if it is 'bad' something went wrong, you know ?

>Anyway, since we are both not native English speakers, it should be no
>surprise that this misunderstanding happened.  There's no need to be
>so upset because of that.
I wasn't upset about the misunderstanding, and I'm not sure why you
think that I was upset at this point. I was merely taken aback that
even though I referred to '___cxa_bad_typeid' in the preceding
sentence in my question, you thought that I enquired about the reason
why 'free' crashed.

>> >Then I don't understand your question at all.  Your program crashed
>> >because it somehow corrupted the malloc memory chain.  Given that, why
>> >is it important to know what is '___cxa_bad_typeid'?
It was that part that made me upset. I don't like this kind of "Hey, I
answered the question how I understood it, and everyhing else doesn't
matter" attitude.
I'm a curious old bastard and want to know things I currently don't. 
I didn't know what that '___cxa...' message meant, so I asked.
It's how I learn, you know ?

>So there's nothing
>special about '___cxa_bad_typeid' in your case; that function has
>nothing to do with the reasons your program crashes.
Thanks, for the information. If you had said that in the first or in
the second message - when you knew that I actually wanted to know what
the '___cxa...' message was all about - my already frail nerves - too
much coffee, too many days without finding anything about it, etc. -
wouldn't have been strained even more.

>> Are
>> these enough reasons for you, or can we just say that you don't know
>> what '___cxa_bad_typeid' means and were pointing out the obvious as it
>> was something you did know ???
And, yes, that part I wrote while being upset. I normally check for
such outbursts before I send my messages, but failed to do it this
time. I'm sorry about that.