Re: stack overflow limit

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 15:51:22 -0300
> Cc: address@hidden
> 
> > Not a request or a suggestion.  I'm just wondering about the stack size 
> > limit
> > (e.g. for regexp search, search.c).
> > Would it make sense to make it any bigger, given that machines
> > nowadays are more powerful and have more memory, or do you consider
> > that pretty much all such stack overflows (e.g. for regexp matching)
> > are just due to poorly chosen regexps?
> 
> IIRC this depends on the OS stack size, which hasn't grown nearly as
> fast as hardware resources.

How much stack does Emacs have on a typical Unix or GNU machine these
days?

The value of re_max_failures we use now needs 4MB of stack on a 32-but
machine, twice as much on a 64-bit machine.  We also need stack space
for GC.  The result should be compared to what Emacs has and what it
can have.

`ulimit' seems to indicate we get 8MB of stack on an x86_64 GNU/Linux
system.  On Windows, we tell the linker to reserve 8MB as well (but
the Windows build is a 32-bit build.)

Ultimately, the question is: should we increase the value of
re_max_failures?