Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior?

From	Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c++
Subject	Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior?
Date	2021-12-13 10:44 +0100
Message-ID	<j1oj05Fk7miU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<f5624610-cbe0-4e27-9f52-f4a900172c89n@googlegroups.com> <sp61ti$phb$1@dont-email.me> <sp6mqk$uob$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw

On 2021-12-13 at 06:48, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> wrote:
>> No. Stack overflow is arguably the least specified behavior of them all.
>> The stack size is extremely limited (few MB), compared to the RAM
>> amounts current computers have (tens of GB). There is no
>> standard-defined way to detect stack overflow, not to speak about
>> handling it.
> 
> That made me think: Why has neither the C nor the C++ standardization
> committees ever thought of adding a standard library utility to get
> the current amount of free stack space?
> 
> Sure, perhaps in some operating systems this isn't something that
> programs can get, but the function in question could be optional in
> that sense. For example it could return -1 to indicate "this operation
> is not supported", else a non-negative value to indicate the amount
> of free stack space. This could give programs at least the opportunity
> to gracefully do something if running out of stack space. I think this
> could be useful especially in programs that need to be as stable and
> secure as possible.
> 
> (In fact, getting the amount of free (physical) RAM available to the
> process could also be useful, for similar reasons. It could behave
> in the same way: -1 if the operation is for some reason not supported,
> else the amount of free RAM (not counting swap).)

This would be of very limited use. The result of a call from one thread 
wouldn't be valid long, if the other threads allocate and free memory 
already while the result is returned.

It is similar to filesystem::exists("path"). If you get a true or false 
back, how long is the result valid? Nanoseconds?

Thread

Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-12-12 00:42 -0800
  Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-12-12 09:52 +0100
    Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2021-12-12 12:59 -0800
  Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-12-13 01:51 +0200
    Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-12-13 05:48 +0000
      Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-12-13 10:44 +0100
        Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-12-13 04:44 -0800
        Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-12-13 07:47 -0500
          Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 08:32 +0100
            Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-12-14 07:49 -0500
              Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-12-14 14:23 +0000
              Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 16:16 +0100
        Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-12-13 12:13 -0500
          Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-12-13 12:05 -0800
            Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-12-13 17:11 -0800
            Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-12-13 19:00 -0800
              Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-12-13 23:03 -0800
          Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 08:33 +0100
            Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-12-14 09:13 +0100
              Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-12-14 10:09 +0000
                Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-12-14 16:14 +0000
                Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 15:23 -0800
              Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-12-14 16:10 +0000
              Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 17:38 +0100
                Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-12-14 17:09 +0000
                Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 18:39 +0100
                Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 11:01 -0800
              Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 10:52 -0800
                Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-12-14 20:15 +0100
            Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-12-14 07:59 -0500
          Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 16:19 +0100
            Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-12-14 11:33 -0500
      Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-12-13 17:23 +0100
      Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2021-12-15 23:27 +0000
        Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-12-16 08:37 +0100
    Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-13 14:16 -0800
      Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-12-13 15:07 -0800
        Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-16 05:53 -0800
          Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-12-16 08:34 -0800
            Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-16 12:17 -0800
              Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-12-16 13:38 -0800
                Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-16 14:15 -0800
            Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-16 20:10 -0800
          Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-12-16 14:14 -0800
            Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-16 20:20 -0800
              Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-12-17 08:46 -0800
      Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-12-14 10:32 +0200
        Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-16 07:42 -0800
          Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2021-12-17 01:07 +0000
            Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-12-17 01:28 +0000
            Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-16 19:54 -0800
              Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2021-12-17 10:06 +0000
  Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-12-13 17:08 +0100
    Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-13 13:50 -0800
      Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-12-14 16:32 +0100
  Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-13 13:13 -0800
  Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-13 15:55 -0800
    Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-13 15:58 -0800
    Re: Has "stack overflow" specified behavior? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-12-14 01:41 -0800

csiph-web