🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <713061696snx@ananke.stgt.sub.org> ak@ananke.stgt.sub.org (Andreas Kaiser) writes:

>Why did IBM implement a fixed stack size in IBM C? Since OS/2 2.0
>provides a paged memory management, there should be no reason not to
>let the stack grow automatically. EMX does it this way. There is just
>one single disadvantage: to notice an endless recursion, you have to
>listen to the sound of your disk drive. But you don't have to count
>stack bytes.

It's only true for the primary thread of an application.  Any threads that
you created under C Set/2 with the beginthread() call it set up with a
maximum stack size, and the compiler handles guard page exceptions in
order to commit additional stack space as necessary, up the maximum specified
when the thread was created.

I don't know why the primary thread doesn't do this as well, unless it's
an OS/2 thing for the primary thread of an executable... I'm not that
familiar with EMX - could it be creating an extra thread right off the bat
to run the program in?

--
-- David
--
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------\
 \              David Bolen             \  Internet: db3l@ans.net      /
  |   Advanced Network & Services, Inc.   \   Phone: (914) 789-5327   |
 / 100 Clearbrook Road, Elmsford, NY 10523  \   Fax: (914) 789-5310    \
\-----------------------------------------------------------------------/