[#1207] warning in ruby extension eats memory — Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@...>

This message was posted to ruby-talk, but I didn't get responce from

22 messages 2003/07/01
[#1208] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — ts <decoux@...> 2003/07/01

>>>>> "E" == Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@itgrp.net> writes:

[#1209] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@...> 2003/07/02

ts wrote:

[#1210] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — ts <decoux@...> 2003/07/02

>>>>> "E" == Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@itgrp.net> writes:

[#1211] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@...> 2003/07/04

ts wrote:

[#1212] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — ts <decoux@...> 2003/07/04

>>>>> "E" == Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@itgrp.net> writes:

[#1213] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@...> 2003/07/04

ts wrote:

[#1214] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — ts <decoux@...> 2003/07/04

>>>>> "E" == Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@itgrp.net> writes:

[#1215] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@...> 2003/07/04

ts wrote:

[#1237] FTP.new with block — Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>

Hi,

22 messages 2003/07/19
[#1238] Re: [Patch] FTP.new with block — ts <decoux@...> 2003/07/19

>>>>> "G" == Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@soyabean.com.au> writes:

[#1240] Re: [Patch] FTP.new with block — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...> 2003/07/19

[#1297] Fix for Bug 1058 — Markus Walser <walser@...>

Hi,

16 messages 2003/07/25

Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory

From: ts <decoux@...>
Date: 2003-07-04 15:16:06 UTC
List: ruby-core #1226
>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

n> At Fri, 4 Jul 2003 22:40:35 +0900,
n> ts wrote:

>> #108454 0x080485f6 in main ()
>> #108455 0x08048515 in _start ()

n> I can't get what you mean, these seem to be called normally.

 108455 call ?

 Try to reproduce the error and you'll see that the number of call is
 less than 108455 when ruby is stopped by stack_check().

 How ruby can make 108455 calls ?

>> bad value from getrlimit() ????

n> On my machine, it was stopped by stack_check() in rb_call0().

 This is this that I don't understand : ruby is not stopped by
 stack_check() and can have 108455 call. This is the value of 108455 that I
 find strange.


Guy Decoux

In This Thread