On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 05:03:11PM -0200, Fr�d�ric L. W. Meunier wrote: > On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Thomas Dickey wrote: > > >I don't recall anyone bumping into that limit before > >(offhand, reading the code, I don't know why we need that > >particular limit). > > Really ? I reported it some time (years) ago.
But I didn't recall that (sorry). > I increased it to 8192. ...or making it reallocatable might be a better solution - since it doesn't (except with contrived cases) grow rapidly, and there aren't many places in the code that have to append to it. -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net _______________________________________________ Lynx-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lynx-dev
