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: 103376,754af7340c705378 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Samuel Tardieu Subject: Re: Help:Ada95:ProtectedType:StackSize Date: 1998/01/12 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 315208698 References: <01bc4a35$4a55f280$17ed38cb@michaeld.senet.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108) Mail-Copies-To: sam@ada.eu.org To: "Michael Davies" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Organization: TELECOM Paris Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-01-12T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: >>>>> "Michael" == Michael Davies writes: Michael> Could someone please help? I'm using Ada95 with the (latest Michael> GA) Rational complier on Solaris 2.X, trying to set the stack Michael> size for a protected type. What do you mean by "trying to set the stack size for a protected type"? You can't set the stack size for a subprogram, why would you want to be able to set it for a protected object[1]? The caller stack will be used when executing a protected operation. If a specific stack was used for the protected object, then simultaneous protected function calls would use the same stack! That's why you have one stack by thread of control. Michael> Why? I'm receiving a storage_error exception during runtime Michael> (during a static var declaration). You should increase the stack size of the tasks calling the protected operations. Sam Footnotes: [1] Except in the case of interrupt handlers which is probably not the case here -- Samuel Tardieu -- sam@ada.eu.org