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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:a02:4d95:: with SMTP id t21-v6mr1025656jad.2.1540506206838; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:23:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:aca:c656:: with SMTP id w83-v6mr14325oif.2.1540506206521; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:23:26 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.166.216.MISMATCH!75-v6no121373itm.0!news-out.google.com!n199-v6ni126itn.0!nntp.google.com!75-v6no121370itm.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:23:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1nx5k9a.1n8zqjs1xf0pe6N%csampson@inetworld.net> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=149.32.224.35; posting-account=Qh2kiQoAAADpCLlhT_KTYoGO8dU3n4I6 NNTP-Posting-Host: 149.32.224.35 References: <1nx0yp3.x6ss3k18nq71lN%csampson@inetworld.net> <1nx5k9a.1n8zqjs1xf0pe6N%csampson@inetworld.net> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Storage_Size in a Simple Program From: Anh Vo Injection-Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 22:23:26 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:54711 Date: 2018-10-25T15:23:26-07:00 List-Id: On Wednesday, October 24, 2018 at 2:07:55 AM UTC-7, Charles H. Sampson wrote: > Charles H. Sampson wrote: > > > I've got a conceptually simple program that uses a lot of memory. It is > > highly recursive (using a lot of stack) and also puts a lot of stuff on > > the heap. Is there any way to specify that a lot of memory is needed > > other than pragma Storage_Size? > > > > As it is, I have three totally artificial tasks hidden in packages. The > > packages' entry routines are simply pass-throughs to their embedded > > task's entries. There are no concurrency issues because the simple > > program is single-threaded at heart. > > > > Is that it? That's a lot of baggage just to give permission to use more > > memory, particularly when there's a lot of memory lying around now. > > All the responses about limit/ulimit are certainly solutions, but > they're not quite what I was asking about. I was looking for a solution > written in Ada. I've been around Ada long enough to remember that a goal > was to be able to completely express programs in Ada itself without > having to worry about outside influences. (I write this knowing that the > semantics of pragma Storage_Size are not at all tight.) > > To my knowledge, the current specification of Ada comes closer to that > goal than any other language. How about use task wrapper and pragma Storage_Size (...) combo. Anh Vo