Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 16:41:30 +0300 From: "Eli Zaretskii" Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Message-Id: <5137-Sat30Jun2001164130+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 In-reply-to: <3b3d9a68.364006408@news.primus.ca> (invalid@erehwon.invalid) Subject: Re: CWSDPMI/DJGPP integration [was Re: Peculiar behavior of program.] References: <3b3bcc05 DOT sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <3b3c14b3 DOT 264226436 AT news DOT primus DOT ca> <3b3bd249 DOT sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <3b3d9a68 DOT 364006408 AT news DOT primus DOT ca> Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk > From: invalid AT erehwon DOT invalid (Graaagh the Mighty) > Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp > Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:24:56 GMT > > On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 0:56:41, "Charles Sandmann" > sat on a tribble, which squeaked: > > >This won't catch huge overruns, but if you write-protect the entire text > >section you will at least prevent overwrite of executable code and catch > >errors sooner with correct error messages. > > For non-self-modifying-code (and self-modifying is rare these days -- > self-modifying algorithms work best by using function pointers or ints > and switch statements) this should work. The limitation Charles mentioned has nothing to do with self-modifying code. What Charles told you is that if you have a very large off-stack allocation, like if you have a large automatic array or structure, or even a simple alloca(1000000), the separate stack segment won't detect it.