Path: utzoo!yunexus!ists!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ucsd!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!cod!bmarsh
From: bmarsh@cod.NOSC.MIL (William C. Marsh)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Arrays > 64k revisited
Message-ID: <1702@cod.NOSC.MIL>
Date: 17 Nov 89 23:39:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: cod.1702
References: <5860@lindy.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: bmarsh@cod.nosc.mil.UUCP (William C. Marsh)
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Lines: 20

In article <5860@lindy.Stanford.EDU> LC.YRS@forsythe.stanford.edu (Richard Stanton) writes:
+SOmeone suggested that the Quick C malloc function would work with
+arrays > 64k in the huge model.

+I wrote a simple test program to try this, using either halloc/hfree
+or malloc/free to allocate 100000 bytes, fill them with ASCII 0,

+THe program worked fine using halloc. Using malloc, the allocation
+seemed to go OK (NULL was not returned), but when the program ended,
+I had to reboot as everything I tried to do produced a message
+saying I was out of memory.

Since malloc() only expects an unsigned, and since 100000 > 65535, malloc()
cannot be used to allocate a huge array.  halloc() expects a long...

Bill Marsh, Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego, CA
{arpa,mil}net: bmarsh@cod.nosc.mil
uucp: {ihnp4,akgua,decvax,dcdwest,ucbvax}!sdcsvax!nosc!bmarsh

"If everything seems to be coming your way, you're probably in the wrong lane."