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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,133de21eb82605b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Matthew Heaney <matthew_heaney@acm.org>
Subject: Re: How do functions return unbounded arrays?
Date: 1998/06/17
Message-ID: <m3lnqwyiaw.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 363444044
References: <358444BA.757121D8@cl.cam.ac.uk>
 <1998061518584100.OAA28557@ladder01.news.aol.com>
Organization: Network Intensive
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-06-17T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


johnherro@aol.com (John Herro) writes:

> > Are there Ada programs that cause a heap
> > overflow just by calling "&" in a long loop?
> 
> That question I can answer definitely.  The following program raises
> Storage_Error on my machine when compiled with Open Ada (an Ada 83
> compiler).  [program example snipped]

This is hardly a definate answer.  All it proves is that in one Ada 83
implementation, storage error gets raised.

We could probably make the storage error go away by declaring the string
in a nested block:

procedure Test is
begin
   for L in Long_Integer range
        10_000_000 .. 99_999_998 loop

      declare
         S : constant String :=
           Long_Integer'Image(L) &
           Long_Integer'Image(L + 1);
      begin
         null;
      end;

   end loop;
end Test;

I think the memory will get cleaned up when the frame terminates (that
is, every pass through the loop), and therefore storage_error won't
happen.