[Rd] Segmentation fault when options(max.print = .Machine$integer.max)
maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch
Tue Sep 25 17:29:59 CEST 2012
>>>>> Martin Morgan <mtmorgan at fhcrc.org>
>>>>> on Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:34:12 -0700 writes:
> On 09/25/2012 05:26 AM, Martin Maechler wrote:
>>> Seemed like a good idea at the time,
>> I'm curious. Why is it (setting max.print much too
>> large) a good idea?
> I usually set it considerably smaller (50) than default to
> conserve screen real estate, but then occasionally need to
> see more than my small setting (e.g.,
:-) :-) that's a good one...
but even for that and for the longer
options(max.print = 1000)
> and don't want to guess at how much I want to see.
I understand. But really the reason we had introduced it,
*was* exactly equivalent to saying that setting it to
"practically Inf" is unreseasonable.
If you want it really large, use a million which is already more
than you want, and '1e6' is really faster typing than .Machine$..
> Thanks for your fix.
>>> but > options(max.print = .Machine$integer.max) > 1:10
>>>  Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
>>> because of an integer overflow at
>>> > sessionInfo() R Under development (unstable)
>>> (2012-09-24 r60800) Platform: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
>>> (64-bit) ...
>>> also R-patched, etc.
>> Thank you, Martin. I'm about to commit fixes for this.
>> "another" Martin.
>>> Computational Biology / Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research
>>> Center 1100 Fairview Ave. N. PO Box 19024 Seattle, WA
> Computational Biology / Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research
> Center 1100 Fairview Ave. N. PO Box 19024 Seattle, WA
> Location: Arnold Building M1 B861 Phone: (206) 667-2793
More information about the R-devel