Re: ALLOCATABLE arrays

From: Richard Edgar (rge21_at_astro.su.se)
Date: 01/05/04 

Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:57:50 +0100

Tony Jay wrote:

> This technique can cause problems if you have insufficient stack size
> (especially if ou add in a second array at a later date)

Granted, but why do automatic arrays _have_ to go on the stack? Why
can't a compiler just do an ALLOCATE/DEALLOCATE behind the scenes, if
the array is (or could) be big enough to require it?

Richard

Relevant Pages

  • Re: tictactoe
    ... >> a new array based on an existing array where the new one has x's where ... Here's your original array: ... You want the second array to have the same number of elements as the ... The loop examines each element of the original array one at a time, ...
    (comp.lang.java.help)
  • Re: Arrays - Revamped.
    ... You second array is still not good enough compared to the first array. ... You've already arranged the stats from highest to lowest. ... Spe par par par par par par ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: Arrays - Revamped.
    ... You second array is still not good enough compared to the first array. ... You've already arranged the stats from highest to lowest. ... Spe par par par par par par ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: Arrays - Revamped.
    ... You second array is still not good enough compared to the first array. ... Stat bonuses: ... Spe par par par par par par ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: this problem is annoying
    ... >i am trying to write a generic rotation function ... >rely on using a second array. ... >rotating each character twice would yield: ...
    (comp.programming)