A new squeak ObjectMemory?

John M McIntosh johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com
Wed Feb 6 00:50:31 UTC 2002


>At 23:13 Uhr -0800 01.02.2002, John M McIntosh wrote:
>>Well there are two problems.
>>
>>a) Squeak only works within the 0-2GB address range. This should be fixed so
>>that Squeak can live with 0-4GB.
>
>Are you really sure ?
>The initial Squeak release had this limitation. My fix has been in 
>the release image for a number of years (1998 or so). Is the object 
>memory broken again ?
>
>Georg
>--
>----
>Dipl.Ing. Georg Gollmann                TU-Wien, Zentraler Informatikdienst
>                                         Wiedner Hauptstr. 8-10 / 020B
>phon:(+43-1) 58801 - 42022              A-1040 Wien
>fax: (+43-1) 58801 - 42099
>mail:gollmann at zid.tuwien.ac.at
>http://macos.tuwien.ac.at/Gollmann.html

Yes in a few places an oops address is taken as a long integer, that 
then is used to calculate a header offset, that then crashes because 
a negative int + positive offset doesn't quite mean the same thing as 
adding a positive offset to an pointer.

I tripped over this when a 1GB image was cheefully loaded at the 2GB 
boundary by  OS-X.

-- 
--
===========================================================================
John M. McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com> 1-800-477-2659
Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
===========================================================================



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list