Path: csiph.com!news.swapon.de!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: filling area by color atack safety
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:48:16 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <86sf0gkcnj.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <ut3669$21eur$1@i2pn2.org> <ut4020$2s8ov$1@dont-email.me> <87wmq2jn7s.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <ut4ba7$2uits$1@dont-email.me> <87frwpje2b.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <ut6o5l$3h3cb$3@dont-email.me> <FUBLN.90799$Wbff.11445@fx37.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6af46d5f1415f729bb6ec55b5ea784b7"; logging-data="4000316"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+DkrAcxWcWsE50EM3VCvRjz30ToyEMbkk="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:KFiKb7+/ekd3cFMSeczo7aj2I70= sha1:sUwK2FXDAy8tHiWG7b1JO0qm+dc=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:383935

scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:

>> Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> The convetional wisdom is the opposite, But here, conventional wisdom
>>> fails.  Because heaps are unlimited while stacks are not.
>
> That's not actually true.   The size of both are bounded, yes.
>
> It's certainly possible (in POSIX, anyway) for the stack bounds
> to be unlimited (given sufficient real memory and/or backing
> store) and the heap size to be bounded.   See 'setrlimit'.

The sizes of both heaps and stacks are bounded, because
pointers have a fixed number of bits.  Certainly these
sizes can be very very large, but they are not unbounded.