Ok guys, Thanks for your help. My problem occurs because I am not treating correctly the events stack before release the dynamic form and their objects. Everything is working well now.
Again, Thanks, J�lio F�bio de O. Chagas Gerente de Projetos email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] +55(11)3055-3159 Grupo Quadrata http://www.quadrata.com.br ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Rollin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Palm Developer Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 2:38 AM Subject: Re: MyApp just changed the emulated program counter to 0x10C23F65 > At 10:25 PM -0600 12/10/01, Ben Combee wrote: > > > But I don't know every way you could be messing up the > >> stack. Maybe someone with more compiler knowledge > >> would like to comment. (Ben?) > > > >The easiest way to kill your return address on the stack is to overrun > >the bounds of an array you have as a local variable. Saying > > > >char foo[4]; > >strcpy(foo, "test"); > > > >can kill your return address, since you write one character too many. > >This could also kill the saved frame pointer, making the function > >returned to malfunction. > > While this is a common way to kill your return address (or other > local variables on the stack), it doesn't seem to be what's going on > here. The invalid address is 0x10C23F65. If the return address were > being smashed, you'd expect to see the upper bytes corrupted, not the > lower bytes. > > I find it interesting that the low byte is 0x65, or the ASCII value > for 'e'. But that may be just a coincidence (as is the fact that the > previous byte is ASCII for '?'). > > Of course, Julio *could* be doing something like: > > char foo[4]; > foo[11] = 'e'; > > But I might be stretching there... > > > -- > For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see http://www.palmos.com/dev/tech/support/forums/ > -- For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see http://www.palmos.com/dev/tech/support/forums/
