From:	mert0407 AT sable DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk (George Foot)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: virtual memory exhausted
Date:	30 Apr 1997 08:00:31 GMT
Organization:	Oxford University, England
Lines:	33
Message-ID:	<5k6u6v$fsi@news.ox.ac.uk>
References:	<UPMAIL16 DOT 199704291618450131 AT msn DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	sable.ox.ac.uk
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Ron Stawicki (r_stawicki AT msn DOT com) wrote:

: I also have a few questions:

: 1) WIN95 provides a virtual memory manager; is this just specific to
: windows, or does it tie in?

Win95 uses virtual memory, and provides it for applications run under it,
including DPMI applications. The virtual memory won't look any different
to normal physical memory to you, but you can still use it. 

: 2) WIN95 has native DPMI, or is that what is provided by EMM386?

Win95 does provide DPMI services to your program, yes, provided the GUI is
running. EMM386 does not.

: 3) Does CSDPMI conflict with the native DPMI?

CWSDPMI is only loaded if there is not already a DPMI server available, so
no it doesn't in practice.

: 4) As mentioned above, what would cause cc1plus to emit virtual 
: exhausted sooner than if the stack size is set to a lower size?

At a guess it is the internals of cc1plus; if you have a complicated class
structure or something cc1plus may do something (nested functions?
alloca?) which burns up stack space, and it runs out too fast. Note that
what you adjusted was cc1plus's internal stack space, not the stack space
of the executable you are producing.

-- 
George Foot <mert0407 AT sable DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk>
Merton College, Oxford

- Raw text -