On Sun, 14 Sep 1997, Chris Jacobson wrote:
>Well I was using the new buffers, but I switched it back to using buffers
>for arg and arg2, and a static 32k sized 'buf', and everything works
>fine. The problem was apparently sometimes the buffer would get overrun
>(I coudl tell this because it would crash in release_buffer or
>aquire_buffer, in the give and give->next, where "pring (char[4])give"
>would produce a short 4-character string that was obviously part of the
>buffer. I think here using a static 32k buffer might be better in this
>one function anyways, since it would get used a lot.
You just said that the buffer will be overrun and now you're saying a
static 32k buffer would be better? Perhaps you should fix the overrun
because those are particularly nasty. My code attempts to detect them but
of course, with memory being FUBAR'd after an overrun, sometimes it will
crash and sometimes it'll be detected.
If you don't think memory problems are nasty, a small oversight in the
castle code assigning to mob_index[-1] caused OasisOLC to crash on Solaris
but nowhere else. Took about 6 hours to find.
--
George Greer - Me@Null.net | Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity
http://www.van.ml.org/~greerga | is not thus handicapped. -- Elbert Hubbard
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/08/00 PST