PS: what would be *really* nice is a way to query the current and 'high 
water mark' stack sizes (only in debug mode, or with a specific build 
option), to get an idea how much stack a program/thread is using, instead 
of depending on trial-and-error.

On Tuesday, 11 October 2022 at 17:27:07 UTC+2 [email protected] wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 12:13 AM Floh <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> My C code is still quite stack heavy, because a lot of my code 
>> essentially uses the stack as per-frame arena allocator ;) But I guess as 
>> long as there's a compiler/linker option to set the stack size I think it's 
>> fine.
>>
>> Will a stack overflow cause a proper runtime error, or will this result 
>> 'undefined behaviour'?
>>
>
> The plan is to enable `STACK_OVERFLOW_CHECK=2` in debug (-O0) builds 
> (currently we just use `STACK_OVERFLOW_CHECK=1`).   This should give 
> precise errors at the point of overflow.
>
>
>> On Tuesday, 11 October 2022 at 01:34:07 UTC+2 [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> Bumping this discussion because I'm taking a look at landing this once 
>>> again.
>>>
>>> In answer to the pthread question: Yes I'm planning on changing the 
>>> default for both the main thread and pthreads (The plan is to make them the 
>>> same by default).
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 3:24 AM 'Maksim Ivanov' via emscripten-discuss <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> One question: Will this planned change only affect is only for the main 
>>>> thread? In case there's no change for background threads (e.g., created 
>>>> via 
>>>> pthreads), it'll be useful to mention it somewhere.
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 2:01:11 PM UTC+2 jj wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ke 19. toukok. 2021 klo 11.27 Floh ([email protected]) kirjoitti: 
>>>>> > 1 MB is quite certainly ok (but might be a problem for code with 
>>>>> lots of recursions?), but I think 64 KByte is asking for trouble ;) 
>>>>>
>>>>> Btw, I would recommend you to try how small you can go. I would be 
>>>>> surprised if you are running into issues with 64KB today. (recursions 
>>>>> won't increase to this limit, unless the recursing functions have 
>>>>> locals that have their addresses taken) 
>>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>>
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>> Groups "emscripten-discuss" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>>
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/d7c00f7e-6bc2-4ae8-ae2d-0353ae4cff80n%40googlegroups.com
>>>>  
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/d7c00f7e-6bc2-4ae8-ae2d-0353ae4cff80n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "emscripten-discuss" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected].
>>
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/7c70d4dc-d14b-4282-9a82-1c1e08393dd0n%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/7c70d4dc-d14b-4282-9a82-1c1e08393dd0n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"emscripten-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/218eec81-edce-45b7-b061-a1d57f381d3an%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to