On Aug 5, 2006, at 8:46 PM, John Balestrieri wrote:
I thought the stack space was increased a couple of years ago? If
that was the case, it looks like it's be knocked down again.
John
I don't think that it has been increased. I may have missed
something, although any mention of 32k stack limitation catches my
eye since I was bitten by it in 5.0.
Jack
On Aug 5, 2006, at 1:52 PM, Thomas Moore wrote:
I have just tried recompiling an old program in RB2006r3 (Mac OSX
10.4.7) and got a compiler error message that I have not seen
before: "This method uses 32k of stack space, but the limit is
32k". (I get the same message in 2006r2, can't check for versions
before that.) Is this a new limitation, or a bug? Is there a
workaround or a way to increase this limit? I don't think that it
will be easy to rewrite the method so that it uses less stack
space (not even sure how to begin...)
Any help would be appreciated! Thanks, Tom Moore
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
