[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Stack overflows (was: Re: Future of Debian uncertain?)

Falk Hueffner wrote:

> It's not that difficult to hit when you do functional style
> programming, e. g.

You clipped the context enough that I'm not quite sure what you mean by
"it", but from the subject I'll assume "it" is a stack overflow. In
which case functional programming is actually _less_ likely to require a
huge stack if you have tail recursion and know how to use it. Also, most
functional languages, in my experience, don't use a statically-allocated
stack for subroutine call returns.

> It would already be quite helpful IMHO if one
> didn't just get a SEGV, since that usually indicates a program error.
> I don't think there are any free signal numbers, though. Maybe one
> should send SIGBUS or something?

A stack overflow is not a bus error. It's a segment violation. And quite
often, a stack overflow _is_ a program error.


Attachment: pgpKFuhRlcoYx.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: