Re: safety of GCJ-generated code

[Adam Megacz <gcj at lists dot megacz dot com>]

Andrew Haley <aph@cambridge.redhat.com> writes:
> > Interestingly, in my mucking around with the win32 stuff, I though I
> > saw something about a special "Stack Overflow Signal" on
> > win32... perhaps it might be as simple as just catching that signal
> > and then "throw new StackOverflowException()"...

> Erm, but you'd have no stack to call new().  :-)

Could we keep around a "reserve instance" of StackOverFlowException,
allocated in main(), for such occasions? Perhaps even recycle a single
instance, at the expense of not a stack trace on it (better than
nothing).


> Alternatively, I guess you could limit the number of local variables
> in a stack frame.

The JVM spec already does this, I believe... I think it's something
like 32 variables, each 4 octets long?


  - a