Am 28.07.2017 um 18:56 schrieb David Kastrup: > David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> writes: > >> On Fri 28 Jul 2017 at 15:16:03 (+0200), David Kastrup wrote: >>> Bernhard Kleine <bernhard.kle...@gmx.net> writes: >>> >>>> Am 28.07.2017 um 00:55 schrieb Guy Stalnaker: >>>>> Exited with return code -1073741819 >>>> This has come up with the same number IIRC repeatedly. >>> It's Windows' helpful way to refer to a segfault. Storing something >>> more descriptive like "Segmentation violation" for several dozen >>> signal-based error messages would consume too much memory needed for >>> spyware. 16kB should be enough for anybody. >> I don't understand what the OS would do with these error messages. >> On error, the OS returns a code¹ which is handled by the caller. >> When I run a program under strace, I can see the OS generating >> hundreds of errors every second and they all go unreported except >> as a return code. It's up to the application to decide whether to >> finally report something, and what that is. > On Posix systems, applications are usually started by the shell and the > shell translates return codes corresponding to a process aborted by a > signal to a suitable message. > > Why is Windows incapable of doing the same? > It happens obviously not often enougp to cause the giant to react.
-- spitzhalde9 D-79853 lenzkirch bernhard.kle...@gmx.net www.b-kleine.com, www.urseetal.net - thunderbird mit enigmail GPG schlüssel: D5257409 fingerprint: 08 B7 F8 70 22 7A FC C1 15 49 CA A6 C7 6F A0 2E D5 25 74 09
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
