R
Ramana
how the data will be stored in Stack or Heap
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
C
Cor
Hi Ramana,
In bytes
Was this the question?
Cor
In bytes
Was this the question?
Cor
H
Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]
* "Ramana said:how the data will be stored in Stack or Heap
As this is not a question related to VB.NET, you may want to post the
question to a more general group like microsoft.public.dotnet.general.
O
Ot
Cor said:Hi Ramana,
In bytes
Was this the question?
Cor
Cor,
Are you sure you don't work for Microsoft? Your answer was technically
correct, but not very useful (as articles from MS often are).
In any case... Although I am not Ramana, I have a related thoughts so I
thought I'd drop it in this thread.
I suspect that the "stack" is the run-time stack used by the executing
processes. There would be only one run-time stack to keep track of all the
different threads and for use within a thread. Since it is a stack, items
are pushed onto it and popped off. Eventually everything in the stack will
be "used up." Please correct me if this is a wrong guess.
My guess is that the "heap" is another data structure that is also used and
managed by the executing processes. There seems to be a garbage collection
involved with this entity. That is, when data on the heap is no longer
referenced by anything, it is eligible to be deleted. Unlike the stack,
not everything put on the heap is "used up." Again, please correct me if I
am wrong.
If this turns out to be correct guessing, and is confirmed by a real
expert, like Cor, perhaps this also would answer Ramana's question.
Regards.
C
Cor
Hi Ot,
On a certain moment, it did not interest me anymore how memory management
was done.
(Therefore, my answer about bytes was exact what I was thinking)
It can only be interesting for me if I am in doubt if it is sufficient for
the purpose of the computer.
At the moment it does not interest me at all where it is. It is there where
the OS designers (or even the ones who made the framework) have placed it.
(But the way you did write it is the same as I think about it, and the only
thing I add therefore is, that I think it is absolutly not intresting when a
pointer is given free or the garbage collector is working if there is enough
memory)
(With the executing processes you mean of course executing program processes
managed by the OS or whatever)
Cor
On a certain moment, it did not interest me anymore how memory management
was done.
(Therefore, my answer about bytes was exact what I was thinking)
It can only be interesting for me if I am in doubt if it is sufficient for
the purpose of the computer.
At the moment it does not interest me at all where it is. It is there where
the OS designers (or even the ones who made the framework) have placed it.
(But the way you did write it is the same as I think about it, and the only
thing I add therefore is, that I think it is absolutly not intresting when a
pointer is given free or the garbage collector is working if there is enough
memory)
(With the executing processes you mean of course executing program processes
managed by the OS or whatever)
Cor
H
Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]
* "Ot said:Are you sure you don't work for Microsoft? Your answer was technically
correct, but not very useful (as articles from MS often are).
LOL.
M
Mattias Sjögren
There would be only one run-time stack to keep track of all the
different threads and for use within a thread.
Each thread has its own stack.
Since it is a stack, items
are pushed onto it and popped off. Eventually everything in the stack will
be "used up." Please correct me if this is a wrong guess.
I'm not sure what you mean by "used up".
Mattias