If you have declared the array in local scope (inside some routine), size limit is determined by stack size. -If gcc is running on linux, the stack size is determined by some environment variable. Use ulimit -a to view and ulimit -s STACK_SIZE to modify the stack size.
-If gcc is running on windows (like MinGW), stack size can be specified by gcc -Wl,--stack, STACK_SIZE.
If you have declared the array in global scope, the array is stored in DATA or BSS section (based on whether the array is initialized or uninitialized respectively). The DATA and BSS section size are determined by underlying OS.
If you have declared the array in static scope (like static int array[SIZE]), again, the array is stored in DATA or BSS section (based on whether the array is initialized or uninitialized respectively). The DATA and BSS section size are determined by underlying OS.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
We spend a lot of time and do lots of efforts to manage such big
things in computers! You want a flat address space; the bigger, the
more OS oriented your solution will need be. No one tried to answer my
question(s)? I am having trouble reading file lists in Windows...
If you have declared the array in local scope (inside some routine), size
limit is determined by stack size. -If gcc is running on linux, the stack
size is determined by some environment variable. Use ulimit -a to view and
ulimit -s STACK_SIZE to modify the stack size.
-If gcc is running on windows (like MinGW), stack size can be specified by
gcc -Wl,--stack, STACK_SIZE.
If you have declared the array in global scope, the array is stored in DATA
or BSS section (based on whether the array is initialized or uninitialized
respectively). The DATA and BSS section size are determined by underlying
OS.
If you have declared the array in static scope (like static int
array[SIZE]), again, the array is stored in DATA or BSS section (based on
whether the array is initialized or uninitialized respectively). The DATA
and BSS section size are determined by underlying OS.
You are not the OP and if you don't understand the answer ( and consider it "not trying to answer" ) maybe you should consider something simpler to start with?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hi,
I try to use a large double array, but here seems to be some overflow if I make it too large:
What's my problem? Is this supposed to be like that and if so, how can I use larger arrays?
Thanks,
basti_b
Windows 7, Dev-C++ 5.4.0, TDM-GCC 4.7.1 64-bit
Edit: added system information, changed 2nd array name to avoid misunderstandings
Last edit: basti_b 2014-05-24
Propably you've declared the same name of array f ?
2014-05-22 12:44 GMT+02:00 basti_b der_ich@users.sf.net:
haha, You're funny...
No. I just put them together in there to clarify the problem.
In reality I just added/deleted a 0 in [].
Answer fetched from stack overflow:
If you have declared the array in local scope (inside some routine), size limit is determined by stack size. -If gcc is running on linux, the stack size is determined by some environment variable. Use ulimit -a to view and ulimit -s STACK_SIZE to modify the stack size.
-If gcc is running on windows (like MinGW), stack size can be specified by gcc -Wl,--stack, STACK_SIZE.
If you have declared the array in global scope, the array is stored in DATA or BSS section (based on whether the array is initialized or uninitialized respectively). The DATA and BSS section size are determined by underlying OS.
If you have declared the array in static scope (like static int array[SIZE]), again, the array is stored in DATA or BSS section (based on whether the array is initialized or uninitialized respectively). The DATA and BSS section size are determined by underlying OS.
We spend a lot of time and do lots of efforts to manage such big
things in computers! You want a flat address space; the bigger, the
more OS oriented your solution will need be. No one tried to answer my
question(s)? I am having trouble reading file lists in Windows...
On 5/22/14, Merak mehrak@users.sf.net wrote:
--
Danilo J Bonsignore
Ok, I'll try that.
Windows 7, by the way. Forgot to add it to my original post, I'm going to do that right now.
I don't understand the reply from Bonsignore?
You are not the OP and if you don't understand the answer ( and consider it "not trying to answer" ) maybe you should consider something simpler to start with?