On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 16:24 +0100, Adrian Hey wrote: > Hello Folks, > > Just wondering about this. Please understand I'm not asking why > programs use a lot of stack sometimes, but specifically why is > using a lot of stack (vs. using a lot of heap) generally regarded > as "bad". Or at least it seems that way given that ghc run time > makes distinction between the two and sets separate > limits for them (default max stack size being relatively small > whereas default max heap size in unlimited). So programs can > fail with a stack overflow despite having bucket loads of heap > available?
Perhaps it's there to help people who write simple non-terminating recursion. They'll get an error message fairly soon rather than using all memory on the machine and invoking the wrath of the OOM killer. Duncan _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
