[#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: stack problem

From: Mauricio Fern疣dez <batsman.geo@...>
Date: 2003-07-14 16:57:01 UTC
List: ruby-core #1234
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 01:26:43AM +0900, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> 
> > 
> > On Sat, 12 Jul 2003, Mauricio Fern疣dez wrote:
> > > You can use Init_stack, see the thread starting at [ruby-talk:74400].
> > Thanks. If I understood correctly, I have to use it like this?
> 
> As an explanation for the code snippet: I want to find the bottom of the
> stack, to tell Init_stack about it, because it can't find it by itself; i
> could use (VALUE *)0xBFFFFFFC, but I want to be a bit more
> system-independant than that... Is there a quicker, systematic way of
> finding the bottom of the stack?

If you pass NULL Ruby will take the address of a variable in the stack,
hence recording the bottom of the stack _at that point in time_.

You can ensure things will work OK by calling Init_stack at the
beginning of every access point (function called by the main program).

-- 
 _           _                             
| |__   __ _| |_ ___ _ __ ___   __ _ _ __  
| '_ \ / _` | __/ __| '_ ` _ \ / _` | '_ \ 
| |_) | (_| | |_\__ \ | | | | | (_| | | | |
|_.__/ \__,_|\__|___/_| |_| |_|\__,_|_| |_|
	Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com

'Mounten' wird f drei Dinge benutzt: 'Aufsitzen' auf Pferde, 'einklinken'
von Festplatten in Dateisysteme, und, nun, 'besteigen' beim Sex.
	-- Christa Keil


In This Thread