Path: utzoo!dptcdc!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!amdcad!sun!pepper!cmcmanis
From: cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Lattice 5.02 bugs?
Message-ID: <99476@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 17 Apr 89 20:57:07 GMT
References: <493@bilver.UUCP> <98255@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <505@bilver.UUCP>
Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM
Reply-To: cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis)
Distribution: na
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View
Lines: 27

In article <505@bilver.UUCP> alj@bilver.UUCP (arthur johnson) writes:
>
> I set my stack to 150,000.  I have a procedure which declares two 128 x 128
>integer arrays (i.e., heap o' memory), and the program would exit with a
>"Stack OverFlow" recoverable error unless my stack was that high.  With a
>stack of 150,000, the program would run.
> I'm confused - are you saying that my stack size is TOO large for the program
>to run properly?

No, your stack may still not be large enough. The Lattice compiler can 
detect stack overflows when calling Lattice compiled routines but cannot
check stack usage when calling DOS or C/A library routines. If you are
calling DOS you should have an additional 4K of stack for DOS' usage. 
(Note DOS uses the stack from the bottom up, rather than the top down
so you can often "watermark" it's usage by filling your stack segment
with some value like 555555 and then checking to see how many words got
obliterated.)

> While I'm posting - does anyone know if a public-domain ADA compiler exists
>for the Amiga?  No?  I wouldn't doubt it. 8-)

I seriously doubt it. 

--Chuck McManis
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis   BIX: cmcmanis  ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com
These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
"A most excellent barbarian ... Genghis Kahn!"