On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 09:00:41PM -0600, Tom Whiting wrote: > On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 13:06:17 +1100 > Edwin Groothuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 06:45:20PM -0700, Dale Kingston wrote: > > > if you have MSL defined at 16384, can that cause problems? > > > > Most likely not. > > MSL (and MIL) are just numbers which are hopefully big > > enough to prevent buffer-overflows on your strings. > > > Actually, (and this one's from experience), if MSL is too large, it can up > your mem usage on the system you're running it on. > That, in and of itself can cause rather chaotic problems, if you're running > things from the generic home pc, or if the server admin doesn't know a thing > about what he/she's doing. > > My suggestion: Get rid of MSL completely **ducks** > How, you might ask?? Well, the best way I've found to do so is using a > completely different memory handling code. You can find a copy of it here: > http://drealms.kyndig.com/snippets </shameless plug>
Which one are you refering to? Looks like you're talking about MAX_STRING (which is the global string-space) instead of MAX_STRING_LENGTH (which is the temporary strings in functions) Edwin -- Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.MavEtJu.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Interested in MUDs? Visit Fatal Dimensions: ------------------+ http://www.FatalDimensions.org/
