[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #30423] Incorrect limit for array sizes?

From: Jaroslav Hajek
Subject: [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #30423] Incorrect limit for array sizes?
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 07:08:39 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100506 SUSE/3.5.10-0.1.1 Firefox/3.5.10

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #30423 (project octave):

The fix is trivial (attached), but should it be fixed? I think I've done this
on purpose, though I failed to record it there :(

For instance, consider a sparse row vector of length n = 2147483647 columns
(disregarding the fact that sparse row vectors are a bad idea in practice).
The SparseRep holds boundaries for i-th row in c[i-1]<= j < c[i],
so c needs to be of length n+1. Overflow; bang, you're dead.

Maybe there are other cases where you want an internal buffer of size n+1
(for instance, for cumulative sums).

On the contrary, how does this matter if it's intmax or intmax-1?

(file #20970)

Additional Item Attachment:

File name: max1.diff                      Size:0 KB


Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via/by Savannah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]