Hi Ron: Sorry for I cannot post a reduced code. The application is quite huge and I do not know where it happened. Yes, I am using -gc3, but not aware where the recursion is. IMO, Przemek's example should demonstrate it.
Andi On Wed, 8 Jul 2015 13:15:25 -0700 Ron Pinkas <ron.pin...@xharbour.com> wrote: > Hi Andi, > > Could you kindly post a reduced sample? > > As long as you are not using -gc3 (as per Przemek observation) and/or > recursion which exceeds the fixed limit, then I am not aware of such issue. > > Ron > > > On Jun 30, 2015, at 6:13 AM, Andi Jahja <andi.ja...@yahoo.co.id> wrote: > > > > Hi Przemek, > > > > Many thanks for explanation. Fixing it is beyond my capabilities. For the > > time being, xHarbour users have to be careful when playing with With-Object > > and/or For-Each constructs. > > > > Andi > > > > On Tue, 30 Jun 2015 13:45:41 +0200 > > Przemyslaw Czerpak <dru...@poczta.onet.pl <mailto:dru...@poczta.onet.pl>> > > wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 29 Jun 2015, Andi Jahja wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >>> Hello, > >>> I randomly get this error message: > >>> "WITH OBJECT excessive nesting!" > >>> As per default build, HB_MAX_WITH_OBJECT is preset to 64. > >>> But I am very sure that my application does not have that much nests. > >>> This occurs when I repeatedly execute sub function containing WITH OBJECT. > >>> I suspect the counter is not released after a nest reached an "END" > >>> Anyone? > >> > >> After short checking current HVM code in xHarbour I can see two possible > >> reasons: > >> > >> 1. You are using recursion. > >> Due to limitation in xHarbour implementation FOR EACH and WITH OBJECT > >> cannot be used in algorithms using recursion because they can reach > >> HB_MAX_WITH_OBJECTS or HB_MAX_ENUMERATIONS limits. > >> It's very serious problem I reported nearly 10 years ago. > >> To resolve it it's necessary to redesign FOR EACH and WITH OBJECT > >> implementation in xHarbour. It would be nice to also eliminate > >> overhead caused by current code. Even if programmer does not use > >> above constructions then HVM in xHarbour executes additional code > >> to initialize and finally clean FOR EACH and WITH OBJECT counters > >> and containers on each PRG function call what reduces overall > >> performance. The implementation in Harbour does not have such > >> problems so it can be taken as base. > >> > >> 2. Looks that code executed for -gc3 output does not restore FOR EACH > >> and WITH OBJECT counters. Such additional cleanup it's yet another > >> overhead in current implementation which can be eliminated new one. > >> Example below illustrates it: > >> > >> #include "hbclass.ch" > >> proc main() > >> local i > >> for i := 1 to 100 > >> begin sequence > >> with object i > >> if i < 100 > >> break > >> endif > >> end with > >> endsequence > >> next > >> return > >> > >> This can be easy fixed anyhow I strongly suggest to start deeper > >> modifications which resolved also other problems. > >> > >> best regards, > >> Przemek > > > > > > Andi ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Don't Limit Your Business. Reach for the Cloud. GigeNET's Cloud Solutions provide you with the tools and support that you need to offload your IT needs and focus on growing your business. Configured For All Businesses. Start Your Cloud Today. https://www.gigenetcloud.com/ _______________________________________________ xHarbour-developers mailing list xHarbour-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xharbour-developers
