[Python-Dev] Preventing recursion core dumps (original) (raw)

Vladimir Marangozov Vladimir.Marangozov@inrialpes.fr
Sat, 12 Aug 2000 16:46:40 +0200 (CEST)

Just van Rossum wrote:

(Sorry for the late reply, that's what you get when you don't Cc me...) Vladimir Marangozov wrote: > [Just] > > Gordon, how's that Stackless PEP coming along? > > Sorry, I couldn't resist ;-) > > Ah, in this case, we'll get a memory error after filling the whole disk > with frames No matter how much we wink to each other, that was a cheap shot;

I can't say that yours was more expensive .

especially since it isn't true: Stackless has a MAXRECURSIONDEPTH value. Someone who has studied Stackless "in detail" (your words ;-) should know that.

As I said - it has been years ago. Where's that PEP draft? Please stop dreaming about hostility . I am all for Stackless, but the implementation wasn't mature enough at the time when I looked at it. Now I hear it has evolved and does not allow graph cycles. Okay, good -- tell me more in a PEP and submit a patch.

Admittedly, that value is set way too high in the last stackless release (123456 ;-), but that doesn't change the principle that Stackless could solve the problem discussed in this thread in a reliable and portable manner.

Indeed, if it didn't reduce the stack dependency in a portable way, it couldn't have carried the label "Stackless" for years. BTW, I'm more interested in the stackless aspect than the call/cc aspect of the code.

Of course there's be work to do: - MAXRECURSIONDEPTH should be changeable at runtime - str (and a bunch of others) isn't yet stackless - ...

Tell me more in the PEP.

But the hardest task seems to be to get rid of the hostility and prejudices against Stackless :-(

Dream on .

-- Vladimir MARANGOZOV | Vladimir.Marangozov@inrialpes.fr http://sirac.inrialpes.fr/~marangoz | tel:(+33-4)76615277 fax:76615252