Re: [Jscheme-user] stack overflow in {}

[Geoffrey S.K. <ge...@kn...>]

I'm very surprised to hear that Emacs had a memory problem holding all 
this output, since in Emacs terms, 35,000 is still a relatively small 
number.  I've used Emacs to examine files that were hundreds of 
megabytes in size.  Ten years ago, however, there was an 8MB limit.

I wonder if the Emacs behavior you saw, not being able to hold all the 
output, was a side effect of the Emacs mode you were in.  You wrote that 
you didn't have line breaks.  Perhaps you were in a mode that looked for 
line breaks in order to do font/color customization, and the mode lost 
its way.

Just out of curiosity, try M-x text-mode or fundamental-mode on your 
output buffer before generating huge output, just to see if that keeps 
Emacs from boiling over.  Also, see if you are using a relatively recent 
Emacs (M-x emacs-version).

Geoffrey

On Monday, August 12, 2002, at 08:58 PM, Ken Anderson wrote:

> Rusty an i have been data mining with lists of 35,000 items.
> Things work reasonably OK as long as you don't print them as a list to 
> EMACS without any line breaks.  I usually kill my Jscheme at that point 
> and start over.
>
> I've truncated error messages to 1000 characters which helps a lot with 
> reporting bugs.  Perhaps we should have parameter that effects the 
> REPL, to help reduce the cost of accidents.  Common Lisp had several, 
> such as print-length and print-level, but one might work for us, were 
> small.
>
> We have one example of using {} to generate a web page, with at least a 
> 1300 row x 5 columns x 3 string
> > 19,500 Jscheme frames - leads to a stack overflow.  This seems pretty 
> tiny, but
> the simple experiement:
> (define (grow n)
>   (if (= n 0) '()
>       (cons n (grow (- n 1)))))
> (define (size n)
>   (print n)
>   (grow n)
>   (size (+ n n)))
> (size 1)
>
> produces:
> > 1
> 2
> 4
> 8
> 16
> 32
> 64
> 128
> 256
> 512
> 1024
> 2048
> An unrecoverable stack overflow has occurred.
>
> We were able to rewrite the page in a dumb string-consing accumulator 
> style and get the result we wanted.
>
> Is there an alternative way we can write !{}?
>
> k
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by: Dice - The leading online job board
> for high-tech professionals. Search and apply for tech jobs today!
> http://seeker.dice.com/seeker.epl?rel_code=31
> _______________________________________________
> Jscheme-user mailing list
> Jsc...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jscheme-user
>