I've tried different variations of this:

class foo
{
   int   x;
   int   x1;
   int   x2;
   int   x3;
}

foo[] fooa;

int main(char[][] args)
{
   //fooa.length = 245760;
   while(1)
   {
      try fooa ~= new foo();
      catch
      {
         printf("Allocated %d instances of foo.\n", fooa.length);
         break;
      }
   }

   return 0;
}

This one creates 15360 instances of foo whether on a Win95 machine with 128MB or on a WinME with 256MB.  I searched the docs and could not find anything.  Also, setting the length of the array to anything over 245760 causes an Access Violation error.

What am I missing?

Thanks.

Paul Runde wrote:

> I've tried different variations of this:
> 
> class foo
> {
>    int   x;
>    int   x1;
>    int   x2;
>    int   x3;
> }
> 
> foo[] fooa;
> 
> int main(char[][] args)
> {
>    //fooa.length = 245760;
>    while(1)
>    {
>       try fooa ~= new foo();
>       catch
>       {
>          printf("Allocated %d instances of foo.\n", fooa.length);
>          break;
>       }
>    }
> 
>    return 0;
> }
> 
> This one creates 15360 instances of foo whether on a Win95 machine with 128MB or on a WinME with 256MB.  I searched the docs and could not find anything.  Also, setting the length of the array to anything over 245760 causes an Access Violation error.
> 
> What am I missing?
> 
> Thanks.

I don't think this is a limitation of D.  It may be a limitation of Win9X.  It probably also depends on the computer's available memory since each computer has a finite amount of RAM (even when you consider paging files).  I have 128MB of RAM and I was running several programs at the same time. (I'm running WinXP Home.)

This is what I got:
Allocated 1411072 instances of foo.

And I also got some friendly message boxes popping up telling me I was low on memory. And icons started disappearing.

-- 
Justin
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

J C Calvarese wrote:

> Paul Runde wrote:
>
>> I've tried different variations of this:
>>
>> class foo
>> {
>>    int   x;
>>    int   x1;
>>    int   x2;
>>    int   x3;
>> }
>>
>> foo[] fooa;
>>
>> int main(char[][] args)
>> {
>>    //fooa.length = 245760;
>>    while(1)
>>    {
>>       try fooa ~= new foo();
>>       catch
>>       {
>>          printf("Allocated %d instances of foo.\n", fooa.length);
>>          break;
>>       }
>>    }
>>
>>    return 0;
>> }
>>
>> This one creates 15360 instances of foo whether on a Win95 machine with 128MB or on a WinME with 256MB.  I searched the docs and could not find anything.  Also, setting the length of the array to anything over 245760 causes an Access Violation error.
>>
>> What am I missing?
>>
>> Thanks.
>
>
> I don't think this is a limitation of D.  It may be a limitation of Win9X.  It probably also depends on the computer's available memory since each computer has a finite amount of RAM (even when you consider paging files).  I have 128MB of RAM and I was running several programs at the same time. (I'm running WinXP Home.)
>
> This is what I got:
> Allocated 1411072 instances of foo.
>
> And I also got some friendly message boxes popping up telling me I was low on memory. And icons started disappearing.
>
With windows XP you can  have a huge amount of virtual memory. Simply get a second hard rive and make a few GB virtual memory on each drive.  I think win95 wasn't (isn't) so flexible in this way.  Still virtual memory is slowwwww.

-- 
-Anderson: http://badmama.com.au/~anderson/

J Anderson wrote:
> J C Calvarese wrote:
> 
>>
>> I don't think this is a limitation of D.  It may be a limitation of Win9X.  It probably also depends on the computer's available memory since each computer has a finite amount of RAM (even when you consider paging files).  I have 128MB of RAM and I was running several programs at the same time. (I'm running WinXP Home.)
>>
>> This is what I got:
>> Allocated 1411072 instances of foo.
>>
>> And I also got some friendly message boxes popping up telling me I was low on memory. And icons started disappearing.
>>
> With windows XP you can  have a huge amount of virtual memory. Simply get a second hard rive and make a few GB virtual memory on each drive.  I think win95 wasn't (isn't) so flexible in this way.  Still virtual memory is slowwwww.
> 

Maybe for large collections I should be using class allocators?  But it is just odd that two machines with different OS versions and memory amounts would allocate exactly the same number of instances.  And I would have expected the results above, but neither machine complained.

In article <busj6v$2dl2$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Paul Runde says...
>This one creates 15360 instances of foo whether on a Win95 machine with 128MB or on a WinME with 256MB.  I searched the docs and could not find anything.  Also, setting the length of the array to anything over 245760 causes an Access Violation error.

it is a bug I had reported.

http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D/22303

and I wrote how to fix it.
by rebuilding phobos such as the following article, it'll be fixed.

http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D/21217

yaneurao.

yaneurao schrieb:

[...]
> by rebuilding phobos such as the following article, it'll be
> fixed.
> http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D/21217

Cannot rebuild phobos:
| std\thread.d(337): undefined identifier GetCurrentProcess

Where is the trick?

So long.
-- 
Fight Spam! Join EuroCAUCE: http://www.euro.cauce.org/ 2EA56D6D4DC41ABA311615946D3248A1

In article <buv4go$aun$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Manfred Nowak says...
>Cannot rebuild phobos:
>| std\thread.d(337): undefined identifier GetCurrentProcess
>Where is the trick?

it needs forward declaration like this:

extern(Windows) export void* GetCurrentProcess();
// void* is an alias of HANDLE

yaneurao.

yaneurao wrote:

> it needs forward declaration like this:
> 
> extern(Windows) export void* GetCurrentProcess();
> // void* is an alias of HANDLE

thnx.
extern(Windows) export thread_hdl GetCurrentProcess();
played the trick.

So long.

yaneurao wrote:

> 
> 
> it is a bug I had reported.
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D/22303
> 
> and I wrote how to fix it.
> by rebuilding phobos such as the following article, it'll be fixed.
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D/21217
> 
> yaneurao.
> 
> 

That did the trick.  Thanks.

Paul

"yaneurao" <yaneurao_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:bustsi$2u0b$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> and I wrote how to fix it.
> by rebuilding phobos such as the following article, it'll be fixed.
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D/21217

I have the fix folded in now. Thanks.