Click here to Skip to main content
15,879,326 members
Home / Discussions / Design and Architecture
   

Design and Architecture

 
AnswerRe: Debate reactive programming with me! Pin
Richard MacCutchan18-Jan-23 4:41
mveRichard MacCutchan18-Jan-23 4:41 
AnswerRe: Debate reactive programming with me! Pin
Gerry Schmitz18-Jan-23 5:16
mveGerry Schmitz18-Jan-23 5:16 
AnswerRe: Debate reactive programming with me! Pin
jschell22-Jan-23 8:50
jschell22-Jan-23 8:50 
AnswerRe: Debate reactive programming with me! Pin
jochance7-Mar-23 9:38
jochance7-Mar-23 9:38 
QuestionHeap stack allocation Pin
trønderen15-Jan-23 13:10
trønderen15-Jan-23 13:10 
AnswerRe: Heap stack allocation Pin
jschell22-Jan-23 9:08
jschell22-Jan-23 9:08 
GeneralRe: Heap stack allocation Pin
trønderen23-Jan-23 4:26
trønderen23-Jan-23 4:26 
GeneralRe: Heap stack allocation Pin
jschell24-Jan-23 10:09
jschell24-Jan-23 10:09 
trønderen wrote:
From what you write, it may sound like a mechanism intended for threads requiring a lot of stack space during initialization,


Incorrect. C existed before threads.

The call stack existed then only for controlling the method calling process.

Even now threads on C are more of a add on. So threads must work within the way C does stuff.

trønderen wrote:
suspecting that you refer to something similar to out-of-bounds array indexing:


No I wrote what I meant. You are referring to reading. I was talking about writing.

trønderen wrote:
There may certainly be other limitations on the number of threads, but memory is a significant one.


For every resource available to a running program memory is the one of which there is the 'most' available. Every other resource of any kind is going to be much much smaller.

As a specific example of that it doesn't matter if a language provides a way to provide for an unlimited number of threads when the OS will not. And never will because nothing in computing is unlimited.

trønderen wrote:
You are certainly confusing 64 address bits with 64 gigabyte,


No confusion on my part. You suggested that someone could just plug in an additional 64 gig of memory. That would of course only be to a 64 bit (or higher) CPU. However, as I said, there are very real practical limits on existing computers (the physical boxes and cloud ones) which mean that your suggestion is not generally true.

trønderen wrote:
I find it slightly funny that you spend a lot of space and energy to tell me how non-workable my proposal for a heap allocated stack is


I addressed specific points that you made, because as I pointed out in the very first sentence of my response, you long post seemed to ramble on quite a bit.

So for example in the first part of my response you claimed there was never any reason for doing it - so I showed that there was. I based that on my understanding the history of programming and more specifically on the history of the C programming language.

But in general you claimed that no one does heap based stack allocations but I pointed out that they do. So certainly nothing contradictory in my statements in posting a link that says that.
GeneralRe: Heap stack allocation Pin
jsc4225-Jan-23 1:15
professionaljsc4225-Jan-23 1:15 
GeneralRe: Heap stack allocation Pin
harold aptroot23-Jan-23 1:03
harold aptroot23-Jan-23 1:03 
GeneralRe: Heap stack allocation Pin
trønderen23-Jan-23 4:46
trønderen23-Jan-23 4:46 
GeneralRe: Heap stack allocation Pin
jschell24-Jan-23 10:12
jschell24-Jan-23 10:12 
QuestionSetting Up Client Test Environments Pin
Kevin Marois28-Dec-22 9:48
professionalKevin Marois28-Dec-22 9:48 
AnswerRe: Setting Up Client Test Environments Pin
jschell17-Jan-23 4:34
jschell17-Jan-23 4:34 
AnswerRe: Setting Up Client Test Environments Pin
jochance7-Mar-23 19:23
jochance7-Mar-23 19:23 
QuestionHas x:bind in WinUI 3 effectively killed commanding and converters? Pin
greatoceansoftware23-Dec-22 5:53
greatoceansoftware23-Dec-22 5:53 
AnswerRe: Has x:bind in WinUI 3 effectively killed commanding and converters? Pin
Gerry Schmitz28-Dec-22 16:24
mveGerry Schmitz28-Dec-22 16:24 
GeneralRe: Has x:bind in WinUI 3 effectively killed commanding and converters? Pin
greatoceansoftware29-Dec-22 14:56
greatoceansoftware29-Dec-22 14:56 
QuestionImplementing Google Contacts in WPF App Pin
Kevin Marois13-Dec-22 6:31
professionalKevin Marois13-Dec-22 6:31 
AnswerRe: Implementing Google Contacts in WPF App Pin
Gerry Schmitz14-Dec-22 9:08
mveGerry Schmitz14-Dec-22 9:08 
GeneralRe: Implementing Google Contacts in WPF App Pin
Kevin Marois14-Dec-22 10:22
professionalKevin Marois14-Dec-22 10:22 
GeneralRe: Implementing Google Contacts in WPF App Pin
Gerry Schmitz15-Dec-22 8:07
mveGerry Schmitz15-Dec-22 8:07 
GeneralRe: Implementing Google Contacts in WPF App Pin
Kevin Marois15-Dec-22 12:27
professionalKevin Marois15-Dec-22 12:27 
GeneralRe: Implementing Google Contacts in WPF App Pin
Gerry Schmitz15-Dec-22 16:30
mveGerry Schmitz15-Dec-22 16:30 
GeneralRe: Implementing Google Contacts in WPF App Pin
Kevin Marois15-Dec-22 18:15
professionalKevin Marois15-Dec-22 18:15 

General General    News News    Suggestion Suggestion    Question Question    Bug Bug    Answer Answer    Joke Joke    Praise Praise    Rant Rant    Admin Admin   

Use Ctrl+Left/Right to switch messages, Ctrl+Up/Down to switch threads, Ctrl+Shift+Left/Right to switch pages.