Re: Bug #13587 Updated: Recurence makes crash

At 23:23 07-10-01, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:

By the way, a linked list implementation would in general be faster, while requiring size_t*stack_depth more memory. If the stack remains small all the time however, the current implementation is very slightly faster.

A linked list involves much more allocation, and is thus much slower. It's also very poor if you want to directly access anything but the first element. You're barking at the wrong tree, anyway. Anything built on top emalloc() is safe from out-of-memory related crashes. The crash occurs because of a stack overflow. The process stack, not the engine's zval stack. Unfortunately, it's not detectable. Zeev