Re: segmentation fault with {1..1234567}

[Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 08 Jul 2014 11:38:42 +0100
Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Jul 2014 18:08:06 -0700
> Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Jul 7,  8:33pm, Peter Stephenson wrote:
> > } Subject: Re: segmentation fault with {1..1234567}
> > }
> > } On Sun, 06 Jul 2014 12:46:29 -0700
> > } Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > } > The question is ... do we redefine
> > } > VARARR() [possibly conditionally] to change all the usages at once ...?
> > 
> > Well, that one is easy, as I mentioned earlier; see patch below.  One added
> > hunk in mem.c for a place where we didn't check the return of malloc, but I
> > did not attempt to change the usual fatal-error behavior.
> 
> I'm trying this out, but I'm not sure I'm likely to prod the most likely
> problem areas with my usage.

Not seen any problems.  Should we commit it and see what happens?  I
ought to be making a new release before too long.

pws