From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e219d94b946dfc26
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news.germany.com!ecngs!feeder.ecngs.de!newsfeed.freenet.de!news.tiscali.de!news.belwue.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada.Command_Line and wildcards
From: Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de>
In-Reply-To: <es649nmv3d.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
References: <45dcaed8_6@news.bluewin.ch>
	 <C2026327.9876A%yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>
	 <1172132169.423514.271890@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com>
	 <n7ujre.f7n.ln@hunter.axlog.fr> <wcc1wkhlln0.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
	 <eG$DqrDiEBCi@eisner.encompasserve.org>
	 <wcclkinz7d3.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <r1aEh.1658$N63.691@trnddc08>
	 <wccmz32bf7b.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <45E1B7AA.30804@obry.net>
	 <1dpvltpykld8r$.1rn2ewhc0itjt$.dlg@40tude.net>
	 <yStEh.6202$iF.2036@trndny03> <1s55dlqncctpm$.zs9aloiw8j2l$.dlg@40tude.net>
	 <1172509912.655684.114870@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>
	 <ma3b4sj017.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
	 <1172592793.6285.13.camel@localhost>
	 <es649nmv3d.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <1172594344.6285.18.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:39:05 +0100
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Feb 2007 17:36:43 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: b508761b.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=[b8\Y8KIcPbf1oJaJ0@dmg4IUK<Cl32<a4Fo<]lROoRa4nDHegD_]ReXYf[;UK7DmkN[W<lHX`=Bd\6BhD5G6\ilUE4Aa3RB6om
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:9577
Date: 2007-02-27T17:36:43+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 17:19 +0100, Markus E Leypold wrote:
> Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 18:34 +0100, Markus E Leypold wrote:
> >> "Hyman Rosen" <hyman.rosen@gmail.com> writes:
> >> 
> >> > On Feb 26, 3:44 am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> Further, why do you presume that heap is larger than stack?
> >> >> AFAIK, nothing in RM requires or implies that.
> >> >
> >> > Past experience. If that's not the case for some implementation then
> >> > fine, but I suspect it's more often the case then not. I'm pretty sure
> >> > we've seen newbie examples on the newsgroup where they create
> >> > unconstrained objects (is that the right term?) on the stack and then
> >> > wonder why their program doesn't work.
> >> 
> >> I'm also pretty sure that in most of those cases creating them on the
> >> heap wouldn't work either.
> 
> > Really, isn't this an issue of how to best use GNAT
> > for Ada programs when they have potentially large objects.
> 
> Yes, that's because I said "in most of those cases". _Those_ cases.

But in most of those cases creating the array on the heap explicitly
_has_ worked.
Or am I missing something? I recall array sizes of some 10M.

> Regards -- Markus
>