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,bf2571446148ae30 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Received: by 10.204.129.212 with SMTP id p20mr103264bks.6.1325767187106; Thu, 05 Jan 2012 04:39:47 -0800 (PST) Path: cj8ni50437bkb.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!z19g2000vbe.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Erich Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Can't set executable stack size during compilation Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 04:35:31 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <71e10543-348e-43f8-a30a-447ecae6d5b1@z19g2000vbe.googlegroups.com> References: <4f047e0f$0$6582$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> <4f04c66c$0$6625$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> <4f057934$0$7623$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.242.64.136 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1325767024 11072 127.0.0.1 (5 Jan 2012 12:37:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 12:37:04 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: z19g2000vbe.googlegroups.com; posting-host=85.242.64.136; posting-account=nd46uAkAAAB2IU3eJoKQE6q_ACEyvPP_ User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Google-Web-Client: true X-Google-Header-Order: HUALESNKC X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Ubuntu; X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/9.0,gzip(gfe) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: 2012-01-05T04:35:31-08:00 List-Id: On Jan 5, 10:19=A0am, Georg Bauhaus wrote: > A possible solution of GNAT's stack size issue, an Ada solutions of sorts= , > appears to be available with tasking. Move the computation to a task > and add > > =A0 =A0 pragma Storage_Size (Minimum_Storage_Size); I think I'll go for this solution instead of setrlimit, because I was considering to splitting up the problem into several tasks for multicore CPUs anyway. Thanks a lot for the detailed example! --Erich