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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a59c0afeb6808e51 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-09-02 09:25:10 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn4feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.204!attbi_feed4!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Jeffrey Creem" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <1f358d66.0208302358.6f1c6a39@posting.google.com> <87y9an5tt2.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <1f358d66.0209020705.6769d948@posting.google.com> Subject: Re: Howto debug seg-faulting Ada 95 code? X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.31.5.146 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net 1030983909 66.31.5.146 (Mon, 02 Sep 2002 16:25:09 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2002 16:25:09 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2002 16:25:09 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:28659 Date: 2002-09-02T16:25:09+00:00 List-Id: Well. It may be a bug that it is not caught properly but if it were, all you would be left with is a Storage_Error exception in the place of the segfault. You are blowing the stack because you are trying to declare a large structure on within a procedure (be it the main procedure or a sub program).. Either use new or declare the variable at the library level (in a package) to make it go on the heap. "Karl Ran" wrote in message news:1f358d66.0209020705.6769d948@posting.google.com... > Florian Weimer wrote in message > > Your code causes a stack overflow; "-fstack-check" should catch these > > problems, but it doesn't. Looks like a bug to me. > > Is there a work-around for this software defect, other than using 'new'? > > Where can I find a list of known software defects of gnat 3.14p? > > Thanks, > Karl