After compiling the whole codes without no errors, I'm getting into
the trouble of
&segmentation fault& when I try to run the executable
It's a little bit annoying....
Although I've known it's generated by several factors:
# An array index is outside the declared range.
# The name of an array index is misspelled.
# The calling routine has a REAL argument, which the called routine
has as INTEGER.
# An array index is miscalculated.
# The calling routine has fewer arguments than required.
# A pointer is used before it has been defined.
.....I can't find the fatal factor(s).
But is there any software or package to check this progress?
My OS is openSUSE 11.0, the compiler is SCons.
11941 articles.
1 followers.
22 Replies
4459 Views
[PageSpeed]
On Jun 1, 7:53=A0am, Benjamin &benjami...@& wrote:
& After compiling the whole codes without no errors, I'm getting into
& the trouble of =A0&segmentation fault& when I try to run the executable
& It's a little bit annoying....
& Although I've known it's generated by several factors:
& # An array index is outside the declared range.
& # The name of an array index is misspelled.
& # The calling routine has a REAL argument, which the called routine
& has as INTEGER.
& # An array index is miscalculated.
& # The calling routine has fewer arguments than required.
& # A pointer is used before it has been defined.
& ....I can't find the fatal factor(s).
& But is there any software or package to check this progress?
& My OS is openSUSE 11.0, the compiler is SCons.
Scons appears to be some sort of integrated build environment.
What is the actual Fortran compiler installed on your system?
On 1 Jun., 16:59, steve &kar...@comcast.net& wrote:
& On Jun 1, 7:53=A0am, Benjamin &benjami...@& wrote:
& & After compiling the whole codes without no errors, I'm getting into
& & the trouble of =A0&segmentation fault& when I try to run the executable
& & It's a little bit annoying....
& & Although I've known it's generated by several factors:
& & # An array index is outside the declared range.
& & # The name of an array index is misspelled.
& & # The calling routine has a REAL argument, which the called routine
& & has as INTEGER.
& & # An array index is miscalculated.
& & # The calling routine has fewer arguments than required.
& & # A pointer is used before it has been defined.
& & ....I can't find the fatal factor(s).
& & But is there any software or package to check this progress?
& & My OS is openSUSE 11.0, the compiler is SCons.
& Scons appears to be some sort of integrated build environment.
& What is the actual Fortran compiler installed on your system?
Oh, sry, gFortran is the actual comiler
a debugger might be a great help in this situation.
If you are planning to dig deep into programming,
learning to use the available debuggers is a worthwhile option.
Another possible reason: Too small memory sizes, like stack size.
Can usually be corrected with ulimit.
Benjamin wrote:
& After compiling the whole codes without no errors, I'm getting into
& the trouble of
&segmentation fault& when I try to run the executable
& It's a little bit annoying....
& Although I've known it's generated by several factors:
& # An array index is outside the declared range.
& # The name of an array index is misspelled.
& # The calling routine has a REAL argument, which the called routine
& has as INTEGER.
& # An array index is miscalculated.
& # The calling routine has fewer arguments than required.
& # A pointer is used before it has been defined.
& ....I can't find the fatal factor(s).
& But is there any software or package to check this progress?
& My OS is openSUSE 11.0, the compiler is SCons.
1. Compile with the checking options of your compiler set ON
(e.g., -C -traceback ... check your compiler options list see what to use)
2. Compile with -g, and use tools such as GDB and VALGRIND.
Once you establish that the seg-fault is traceable to your code, you may see
it as a good thing, if the alternative is to propagate erroneous results
throughout your program with no notification to you.
Compiling without errors merely establishes that those errors that are
detectable by static analysis of the code have been removed. By no means
does it follow that there are no more errors left in the code.
On 1 Jun., 17:56, mecej4 &mecej4.nyets...@& wrote:
& Benjamin wrote:
& & After compiling the whole codes without no errors, I'm getting into
& & the trouble of =A0&segmentation fault& when I try to run the executable
& & It's a little bit annoying....
& & Although I've known it's generated by several factors:
& & # An array index is outside the declared range.
& & # The name of an array index is misspelled.
& & # The calling routine has a REAL argument, which the called routine
& & has as INTEGER.
& & # An array index is miscalculated.
& & # The calling routine has fewer arguments than required.
& & # A pointer is used before it has been defined.
& & ....I can't find the fatal factor(s).
& & But is there any software or package to check this progress?
& & My OS is openSUSE 11.0, the compiler is SCons.
& 1. Compile with the checking options of your compiler set ON
& (e.g., -C -traceback ... check your compiler options list see what to use=
& 2. Compile with -g, and use tools such as GDB and VALGRIND.
& Once you establish that the seg-fault is traceable to your code, you may =
& it as a good thing, if the alternative is to propagate erroneous results
& throughout your program with no notification to you.
& Compiling without errors merely establishes that those errors that are
& detectable by static analysis of the code have been removed. By no means
& does it follow that there are no more errors left in the code.
& -- mecej4
Thanks a lot.
I've complied the program with SCons...
now I'm trying to debug the program with gdb..
On Jun 1, 8:01=A0am, Benjamin &benjami...@& wrote:
& On 1 Jun., 16:59, steve &kar...@comcast.net& wrote:
& & On Jun 1, 7:53=A0am, Benjamin &benjami...@& wrote:
& & & After compiling the whole codes without no errors, I'm getting into
& & & the trouble of =A0&segmentation fault& when I try to run the executab=
& & & file.
& & & It's a little bit annoying....
& & & Although I've known it's generated by several factors:
& & & # An array index is outside the declared range.
& & & # The name of an array index is misspelled.
& & & # The calling routine has a REAL argument, which the called routine
& & & has as INTEGER.
& & & # An array index is miscalculated.
& & & # The calling routine has fewer arguments than required.
& & & # A pointer is used before it has been defined.
& & & ....I can't find the fatal factor(s).
& & & But is there any software or package to check this progress?
& & & My OS is openSUSE 11.0, the compiler is SCons.
& & Scons appears to be some sort of integrated build environment.
& & What is the actual Fortran compiler installed on your system?
& Oh, sry, gFortran is the actual comiler
With gfortran try the compiler options '-fbounds-check -Wall -Wextra -
The -Wall and -Wextra option will most likely produce a large amount
that (IMHO) should be fixed.
-fbounds-check should help catch array
index issues.
Benjamin wrote:
& Thanks a lot.
& I've complied the program with SCons...
& now I'm trying to debug the program with gdb..
As others have noted, use all available error trapping and traceback
options first.
One could also disable optimization until the problem(s) is/are resolved
as well as it may make determination of just where something went sought
somewhat easier.
Rarely would there be no clues or breadcrumbs to follow after such has
been done...
On 6/1/ AM, Benjamin wrote:
& After compiling the whole codes without no errors, I'm getting into
& the trouble of
&segmentation fault& when I try to run the executable
& It's a little bit annoying....
& Although I've known it's generated by several factors:
& # The name of an array index is misspelled.
Use &implicit none& if you're not doing so already.
You'll have to
declare all of your variables, and unless you declare two variables with
very similar names, the compiler is likely to catch misspellings.
& # The calling routine has a REAL argument, which the called routine
& has as INTEGER.
& # The calling routine has fewer arguments than required.
Use modules.
The compiler will convert arguments as necessary (someone
want to verify this?) or flag argument list mismatches.
In article &5KWdnQAwhvwt9ZjRnZ2dnUVZ_&,
Louis Krupp &lkrupp_.invalid& wrote:
& Use modules.
The compiler will convert arguments as necessary
No, nothing is converted.
& (someone
& want to verify this?)
You must be thinking of some other language.
Other languages do
sometimes do silent conversions to match arguments.
& or flag argument list mismatches.
This part *IS* right, and that's one of the reasons why modules are so
$.02 -Ron Shepard
On 6/1/ PM, Ron Shepard wrote:
& In article&5KWdnQAwhvwt9ZjRnZ2dnUVZ_&,
Louis Krupp&lkrupp_.invalid&
&& Use modules.
The compiler will convert arguments as necessary
& No, nothing is converted.
&& (someone
&& want to verify this?)
& You must be thinking of some other language.
Other languages do
& sometimes do silent conversions to match arguments.
So reals aren't truncated to integers?
Louis Krupp wrote:
& On 6/1/ PM, Ron Shepard wrote:
&& You must be thinking of some other language.
Other languages do
&& sometimes do silent conversions to match arguments.
& So reals aren't truncated to integers?
In argument lists?
No, a REAL in a CALL statement for a routine
expecting an INTEGER will generate a mismatched argument type error (in
the module during compilation) and a mismatched call if forced to link
outside of one where a compiler may not be able to tell of the mismatch.
dpb wrote:
& Louis Krupp wrote:
&& On 6/1/ PM, Ron Shepard wrote:
&&& You must be thinking of some other language.
Other languages do
&&& sometimes do silent conversions to match arguments.
&& So reals aren't truncated to integers?
& In argument lists?
No, a REAL in a CALL statement for a routine
& expecting an INTEGER will generate a mismatched argument type error (in
& the module during compilation) and a mismatched call if forced to link
& outside of one where a compiler may not be able to tell of the mismatch.
To add to what dpb said: If the expected INTEGER is used as a subscript but
a real (or another mismatched type) was passed instead, a prompt SEGFAULT
may be expected.
On 6/2/ AM, mecej4 wrote:
& dpb wrote:
&& Louis Krupp wrote:
&&& On 6/1/ PM, Ron Shepard wrote:
&&&& You must be thinking of some other language.
Other languages do
&&&& sometimes do silent conversions to match arguments.
&&& So reals aren't truncated to integers?
&& In argument lists?
No, a REAL in a CALL statement for a routine
&& expecting an INTEGER will generate a mismatched argument type error (in
&& the module during compilation) and a mismatched call if forced to link
&& outside of one where a compiler may not be able to tell of the mismatch.
& To add to what dpb said: If the expected INTEGER is used as a subscript but
& a real (or another mismatched type) was passed instead, a prompt SEGFAULT
& may be expected.
Likely (given the format of IEEE floating point, for example), but not
necessarily (if a high virtual address plus garbage with high-order bits
turned on wrap around to a low, valid virtual address).
The same thing would happen in that Other Language with which I'm more
In article &8-GdnX9H3cm8lpvRnZ2dnUVZ_&,
Louis Krupp &lkrupp_.invalid& wrote:
& & You must be thinking of some other language.
Other languages do
& & sometimes do silent conversions to match arguments.
& So reals aren't truncated to integers?
Actually I can't think of any situation offhand where reals are
truncated to integers.
In some contexts, such as mixed arithmetic,
integers are silently converged to reals, but I can't think of any
situations where the reverse occurs.
And especially for subprogram
arguments, no conversion is ever done silently, not even between
different kinds of the same type, much less between different types.
$.02 -Ron Shepard
Ron Shepard &ron-cast.net& wrote:
(snip, someone wrote)
&& So reals aren't truncated to integers?
Actually I can't think of any situation offhand where reals are
& truncated to integers.
In some contexts, such as mixed arithmetic,
& integers are silently converged to reals, but I can't think of any
& situations where the reverse occurs.
And especially for subprogram
& arguments, no conversion is ever done silently, not even between
& different kinds of the same type, much less between different types.
Well, reals are truncated on assignment to an integer variable,
but maybe you don't count that.
Some systems allow real expressions for subscripts, truncating
the value to an integer.
Or course the intrinsic functions specifically designed to
convert non-integer values to integers, as appropriate.
But yes, it is not done for subroutine arguments.
On Jun 2, 3:33=A0pm, glen herrmannsfeldt &g...@ugcs.caltech.edu& wrote:
& Ron Shepard &ron-shep...@cast.net& wrote:
& (snip, someone wrote)
& && So reals aren't truncated to integers?
& & No. =A0Actually I can't think of any situation offhand where reals are
& & truncated to integers. =A0In some contexts, such as mixed arithmetic,
& & integers are silently converged to reals, but I can't think of any
& & situations where the reverse occurs. =A0And especially for subprogram
& & arguments, no conversion is ever done silently, not even between
& & different kinds of the same type, much less between different types.
& Well, reals are truncated on assignment to an integer variable,
& but maybe you don't count that.
& Some systems allow real expressions for subscripts, truncating
& the value to an integer.
troutmask:sgk[218] cat & k.f
program ohmy
x =3D (/ 1, 2, 3 /)
print *, x(2.1)
troutmask:sgk[219] gfc4x -o z k.f
Warning: Extension: REAL array index at (1)
troutmask:sgk[220] ./z
Louis Krupp wrote:
& On 6/1/ PM, Ron Shepard wrote:
&& In article&5KWdnQAwhvwt9ZjRnZ2dnUVZ_&,
Louis Krupp&lkrupp_.invalid&
&&& Use modules.
The compiler will convert arguments as necessary
&& No, nothing is converted.
&&& (someone
&&& want to verify this?)
&& You must be thinking of some other language.
Other languages do
&& sometimes do silent conversions to match arguments.
& So reals aren't truncated to integers?
Certainly not with non-VALUE arguments, but that's true of just about
any language I m it just becomes obvious with C,
C++, etc. because they use value arguments so frequently.
Although I don't think there's a strong technical reason for it, it does
not appear that Fortran will do any automatic conversion for numeric
VALUE arguments.
It seems like something that could be put in without
an obnoxious amount of effort considering that the text of the '03
standard already says, &If the VALUE attribute is specified, the effect
is as if the actual argument is assigned to a temporary, and the
temporary is then argument associated with the dummy argument.&
that's in a Note, and the normative text requires that the actual
argument be type-compatible with non-pointer, non-allocatable dummy with
no qualifications.)
Craig Powers &craig.powers@invalid.invalid& wrote:
& Although I don't think there's a strong technical reason for it, it does
& not appear that Fortran will do any automatic conversion for numeric
& VALUE arguments.
It seems like something that could be put in without
& an obnoxious amount of effort...
other than completely blowing generics out of the water. :-(
And maybe a few other things, but that one immediately occurs to me.
Plus, of course, being completely unlike any other procedure arguments
in the language, which would be bound to cause no end of confusion. It
sure seems a lot simpler and more consistent to just be able to say that
arguments must match and there is never any conversion instead of having
to add &well, except in this one special class of cases, where it is
different just because it could be.&
Richard Maine
| Good judgment c
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle
-- Mark Twain
Richard Maine &nospam@see.signature& wrote:
& Craig Powers &craig.powers@invalid.invalid& wrote:
& & Although I don't think there's a strong technical reason for it, it does
& & not appear that Fortran will do any automatic conversion for numeric
& & VALUE arguments.
It seems like something that could be put in without
& & an obnoxious amount of effort...
& other than completely blowing generics out of the water. :-(
& And maybe a few other things, but that one immediately occurs to me.
A related one that occurred to me right after posting that is all the
stuff about how procedure resolution works. Admitedly, that is related
in that generics get all tied up with it. But I'd call it an additional
complication because it would still need work even if one came up with
some rule to make it compatible with generics. In fact, any such rule
would have to be stuck right in the middle of the the procedure name
resolution stuff.
That's one of the messier few pages of the standard. The only reason it
doesn't generate zillions of questions here is that almost all of the
cases in real progr when you call a procedure by
name, there is usually only one accessible procedure with that name and
that's the one you get. Anything that touches those particular messy
pages counts as a pretty obnoxious amount of effort in my book.
Richard Maine
| Good judgment c
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle
-- Mark Twain
Craig Powers &craig.powers@invalid.invalid& wrote:
& Certainly not with non-VALUE arguments, but that's true of just about
& any language I m it just becomes obvious with C,
& C++, etc. because they use value arguments so frequently.
PL/I will do it under the appropriate conditions, generating
a temporary and passing that.
The value won't be written back
to the original variable, so you have to be careful.
& Although I don't think there's a strong technical reason for it, it does
& not appear that Fortran will do any automatic conversion for numeric
& VALUE arguments.
It makes some sense for BIND(C) VALUE arguments, as C would
do it with a prototype in scope.
& It seems like something that could be put in without
& an obnoxious amount of effort considering that the text of the '03
& standard already says, &If the VALUE attribute is specified, the effect
& is as if the actual argument is assigned to a temporary, and the
& temporary is then argument associated with the dummy argument.&
& that's in a Note, and the normative text requires that the actual
& argument be type-compatible with non-pointer, non-allocatable dummy with
& no qualifications.)
glen herrmannsfeldt &gah@ugcs.caltech.edu& wrote:
& Craig Powers &craig.powers@invalid.invalid& wrote:
& & Although I don't think there's a strong technical reason for it, it does
& & not appear that Fortran will do any automatic conversion for numeric
& & VALUE arguments.
& It makes some sense for BIND(C) VALUE arguments, as C would
& do it with a prototype in scope.
As noted in other threads, Fortran isn't C. And no, I don't buy the
&this was just for comparison purposes.& Sure reads like an explicit
suggestion to put in into Fortran to me.
&C does it& isn't much of a reason to argue that something should be
done in Fortran. It actually has to fit in the Fortran language. Yes,
that is so even for BIND(C) procedures. C does lots of things in
function calls that Fortran doesn't do.
Earlier today or yesterday you were suggesting that something be more
consistent. Now you want to make BIND(C) VALUE arguments behave
fundamentally different from all other arguments, including other
BIND(C) and other VALUE one has to have both to trigger the
special case? This for no reason other than that C does it? You appear
to have a different notion of consistency than I do.
Do note, by the way, that just because a procedure is BIND(C), that
doesn't mean it is necessarily a procedure written in C.
But I don't know why I bother to post this. It ain't going to happen. No
way. As noted in my other post, it would invalidate existing standard
conforming codes by badly breaking generics. Yes, I'd bet there are
existing codes that use BIND(C) procedures in generics. It is a natural
thing to do. While incompatibilities like that have been known to
happen, they tend to fall into one of 2 classes.
1. The incompatibility was not noticed until after the new standard was
published. Often that isn't even enough, as there have been known to be
errata to fix that kind of problem. Such an unnoticed incompatibility
has more than once been cited as being an adequate reason for an errata.
But this one isn't unnoticed. It wouldn't be unnoticed even if I hadn't
pointed out. It is a glaring big incompatibility.
2. There is darn good justification given. Nothing here has been even
close to the kind of justification that tends to be needed. If you think
otherwise, well.... lots of luck. I'll be confident inmy claim that it
ain't gonna happen.
Richard Maine
| Good judgment c
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle
-- Mark Twain
Richard Maine wrote:
& Craig Powers &craig.powers@invalid.invalid& wrote:
&& Although I don't think there's a strong technical reason for it, it does
&& not appear that Fortran will do any automatic conversion for numeric
&& VALUE arguments.
It seems like something that could be put in without
&& an obnoxious amount of effort...
& other than completely blowing generics out of the water. :-(
& And maybe a few other things, but that one immediately occurs to me.
Oops, yeah, I forgot about that.
C++ manages it, but from what I recall when I followed C++ more closely,
conversion and overload matching rules are a consistent sore point.
There are definitely dragons there, so it would make sense to stay away
with Fortran.
Similar Artilces:
What is wrong with the reverse function, gives a segmentatiion
violation. I think it is relates to data alignment.(4 bytes ...).
void main()
char *s=&abcdexgh&;
reverse(s);
printf(&%s&,s);
void reverse( char *s)
char *q,*p;
j=strlen(s);
for(p=s; p & ++p,--q)
On Jan 11, 3:41 pm, sunilk...@ wrote:
What is wrong with the reverse function, gives a segmentatiion
& violation. I think it is relates to data alignment.(4 bytes ...).
It's n...Hi All,
I receive the (fortt1: &174& SIGSEGV?segmentation fault occurred) while try=
ing to run my fortran code using ifort. The code is running well using g95 =
but not ifort. I need to run it on ifort. This seems really strange. Maybe =
debugging can help. But I'm not so professional in using gdb. Any help? =20
Thanks,=20
On 12/13/ PM, Mohammad wrote:
& I receive the (fortt1: &174& SIGSEGV?segmentation fault occurred) while trying to run my fortran code using ifort. The code is running well using g95 but not ifort. I need...Hello,
I apologize in advance if I am posting this on the wrong group, but I
think this may be a Tk related problem so I am hoping someone on here
could help me out.
I need some help please.
I am trying to run a perl script on a
Solaris 10 however, I keep gettting a segmentation fault
I used gdb to try to debug the script and displayed the
following during the segmentation fault error
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0xfee32d98 in Tcl_UtfToExternalDString () from ...
I also did a backtrace and the following was displayed
0xf...Dear all,
I've written a code but the following error has been occurred. As I set a loop (j=1,jjj) this problem happens. I do not why?
Could you please help me. I really need your comments.
forrtl: severe (174): SIGSEGV, segmentation fault occurred
density.ex
density.ex
density.ex
density.ex
I need some help please.
I am trying to run a perl script on a
Solaris 10 however, I keep gettting a segmentation fault
I used gdb to try to debug the script and displayed the
following during the segmentation fault error
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0xfee32d98 in Tcl_UtfToExternalDString () from ...
I also did a backtrace and the following was displayed
0xfee32d98 in Tcl_UtfToExternalDString from /home/Tk.so
0xfeea60a8 in TkWmMapWindow () from /home/Tk.so
0xfeeb1558 in Tk_MapWindow () from /home/Tk.so
0xfee6c69c in MapFrame...Am using apache_1.3.32 (see my config args below).
Digest authentication works fine. But basic auth using either
AuthUserFile or AuthDBMUserFile causes the following error:
[Thu Oct 28 19:22:26 2004] [notice] child pid 27943 exit signal
Segmentation fault (11)
Any ideas?
My realm config from httpd.conf:
&Directory &/Users/acme/www/temp/&&
AuthUserFile
/usr/local/apache/passwd/basic.txt
AuthGroupFile
Require user acme
&/Directory&
Used htpasswd to c...Hello,
Mutt segfaults when replying to certain messages under the Turkish locale,
but not under the &C& locale. The following are copied from a Red Hat 9
linux i686 machine. The segfault is repeatable and happens when I sort
by date and try to reply to a message that is normally part of a mail
thread. The threads in question involve earlier and current dates, i.e.,
the relevant thread is separated when the emails are sorted by date.
The actual message displayed during the segfault is in Turkish,
but its translation into English should be like:
The main text is being us...Hello all,
I am using Intel Fortran Intel(R) 64 Compiler XE for applications running o=
n Intel(R) 64, Version 13.1.0.146 Build
on Fedora 18. I have a for=
tran program (*.f90) which is continuously giving the 'Segmentation fault e=
rror' when I am executing my fortran program after compiling with ifort.=20
I execute as below:
$ ifort -o myprogram myprogram.f90 # creates the object file
$ ./myprogram
# Segmentation fault error pops up on the screen
First, I would like to know what are the various reasons for 'Segmentation =
fault error'? Is it a bug wi...Hi,
I execute a program with gfortran in a MAC OS.
The program opens a file which contains 24 columns and 40000 lines, reads the file and writes in another file the sum of the 24 columns for each line.
For the first five lines the program works properly and then stops returning the error &Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault - invalid memory reference&
Is there any way to solve this?
On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 8:01:07 PM UTC+2, Gordon Sande wrote:
17:03:37 +0000, Nat said:
& & I execu...Hello,
I tried to test the sin transform using fftw, met some problems which
I had no clue what's the reason.
The following is my program, it first does sin transform of sin([1:7]/
8*pi) use flags :FFTW_RODFT00,FFTW_ESTIMATE and there's no problem.
Problem appeared after I try to reuse the 'plan' to do inverse, which
gave 'Segmentation fault'. If I recreate the plan again, the problem
disappears. Also the
Segmentation fault appeared whenever I call
dfftw_destroy_plan(plan).
I'll appreciate your wisdom.
--------------------------------------------...I have compiled a Frortran 90 program using Cygwin (Linux under Windows
XP) g95 without errors and gets 'Segmentation fault' when I try to run
it. The same error occurs for all f90 programs on my work computer. A
friend of mine can compile and run the same programs on his computer but
not the ones compiled on mine. I have installed all the Cygwin-packages
that he has.
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
In the file a.exe.stackdump is:
Exception: STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION at eip=
eax=0A0501E0 ebx=425E55F7 ecx= edx= esi=29B57FD8
edi=6100633C
Please see code below:
void MyFrame::OnTest(wxCommandEvent& event)
wxFileDialog dlg(this);
dlg.ShowModal();
wxString path=dlg.GetPath();
wxMessageBox(path);
When I run it in gdb, it will raise window and report segmention fault.
I don't know why it raise. Anyone
give me a tip?
I use Windows XP
(chinese) and wxWidget 2.6.3 p2
GDB report :
gdb: kernel event for pid=1824 tid=3604 code=EXCEPTION_DEBUG_EVENT)
ContinueDebugEvent (cpid=1824, ctid=3604, DBG_CONTINUE);
gdb: kernel event for pid=1824 tid=3604 code=EXCEPTION_DEBUG_EVENT)
gdb: T...Anyone know the cause of or meaning of the error message &segmentation
fault&? This occurs when running a compiled (and linked?) c program. The
point of error is abreveated below.
int dog(str)
char a[8];
wks = cat(str, a);
.... return 1;
char *cat(str, dest)
char *str, *
if(*wks) &&--- if this line is removed, no error occures
...#include &iostream&
void fun()
a[4] = 4;// of course, there is a segment fault
cout&&a[4]&&
int main()
[apple@t ~]$ ./a
Segmentation fault
why a[4] was printed?
I think it can't compute a[4] via index number,so cout&&a[4]&&endl will
not be executed ,but it wasn't.
when I change a[4] = 4; to a[14] = 4; and comiler and exectue it again
there is no segement fault any more.
the output was
[apple@t ~]$ ./a.out
Does it only can
the end of array 's next position,if far
Web resources about - segmentation fault (SIGSEGV) - comp.lang.fortran
... not to train. Please help improve this article either by rewriting the how-to content or by moving it to Wikiversity or Wikibooks . A segmentation ...Facebook’s performance advertising system lets buyers target users based on identity, location, interests, and Facebook connections, but it doesn’t ...Download the IEEE-TIP paper: http://goo.gl/KgStV Download the Android app: http://goo.gl/qvYDk http://www.ulg.ac.be/telecom/research/vibe/ This ...Market segmentation is a little bit like driving a car, in that everyone believes he is good at it.... co-pays, co-insurance, ease of use, pain in the ass factors and branding’s repuational efforts. One area of particular interest of segmentation ...Benedict Evans on Apple’s segmentation-by-device of new features in iOS:
How do you segment without fragmenting? Apple achieved this pretty ...... few fortunate people have both. Brands can command a price premium or a time premium or both. This leads into a universal cross-category segmentation ...I’m skeptical of old-fashioned segmentation: women, age groups, income levels. With so many data streams accessible and the ability to glean ...One of the most hotly contested discussion topics at PodCamp NH this past weekend was the question of who to follow on social networks like LinkedIn ...The massive data breach at Target last month may have resulted partly from the retailer's failure to properly segregate systems handling sensitive ...Resources last updated: 2/10/:08 AM