stack overflow bug in ofstream::operator<<
Thu Jun 30 13:42:00 GMT 2005
On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 01:15:45PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Jun 28 13:59, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 06:41:09PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>> >Well, I was proposing testing how much space was available on the
>> >stack, so that we never alloca past the bottom of it, and hence don't
>> >*need* any kind of signal handler.
>> If we are going to check how much stack space is available, it might be
>> nice to make a __alloca_which_returns_NULL which returns NULL when there
>> isn't enough space available. That could be used for other things.
>I'm not sure if we can substitute alloca by something which is able
>to return NULL. The gcc implementation of alloca is designed so that
>it doesn't return but jumps back to the caller, and the caller itself
>gets the address for the new stack area by calling
> lea 12(%esp), %eax
> movl %eax, -> target pointer variable
>So alloca is designed in a way which disallows to return NULL at all.
I don't get this. I was just saying that an *alternate* implementation
of alloca which returned NULL when insufficient stack space was
available might be useful, not that alloca itself be rewritten. It is
certainly possible to do that regardless of how alloca is written now.
More information about the Cygwin-developers