On Feb 4, 2007, at 11:30 AM, Joe Huber wrote:
why should it require a lot of stack space. What is it that's
hogging it? The method doesn't get a chance to run as the compile
fails.
Do we have a new limit on our method lengths that never existed
before?
I can see circular references or recursions causing errors but not
this type of method which has neither.
Still wondering if it's a bug or not.
Nope not a bug, although I think there is a feature request for
allowing larger stack frames.
This has nothing to do with the total size of the stack space. (A
runtime issue)
The issue is that the max stack frame that can be allocated for
EACH call of a method has always been limited to 32 kB. (A compile
time issue) The only new issue is that recent versions of RB use
more of the stack frame than prior versions did for the same code.
Read past theads about this issue here, including Mars' explanation:
http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/realbasic-nug/2006-08/
msg00172.html
The solution is to simplify and reduce the size of the offending
method.
Thanks for the link. I read the thread and now understand the issue.
This code is not mine but from a newer user who doesn't even use
anything newer than 5.5.5. The code itself and how he uses it to read
206 checkboxes is in dire need of refactoring,
Thanks to all who responded,
Terry
_______________________________________________
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>
