Article <86jz8kpzam.fsf@linuxsc.com>

Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections
Warning: mysqli::query(): Couldn't fetch mysqli in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\index.php on line 66
Article <86jz8kpzam.fsf@linuxsc.com>

Deutsch English Français Italiano

<86jz8kpzam.fsf@linuxsc.com>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 12:59:13 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <86jz8kpzam.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <vrd77d$3nvtf$2@dont-email.me> <868qp1ra5f.fsf@linuxsc.com> <vrdhok$47cb$2@dont-email.me> <20250319115550.0000676f@yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 20:59:13 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f38801bdea7b04066d3e2a5989bc7bcf";
	logging-data="1616995"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18uQPtcpuBJUiGanFctFXlMndcTlOVqsbw="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:huexaqcsbG57V+WjjUXdv1iQruw=
	sha1:YCkxrbxc+nPW2aWQIb75m55QxW4=
Bytes: 2222

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:

> On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 00:38:44 -0400
> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>
>> On 3/18/2025 11:07 PM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Have you thought about how large the value of 'n' can
>>> become inside the while() loop?
>>
>> I was too smug in my first reply.  After Keith pointed out I needed
>> to read from stdin, I submitted the code again and it passed some
>> tests but failed with 'OUTPUT LIMIT EXCEEDED' when n = 159487.
>>
>> Updating int to long worked, and now I'm bona fide!
>>
>> So thanks.
>
> What you did happens to be sufficient for a particular environment
> (supposedly, x86-64 Linux) used both by yourself and by the server that
> tests results.
> In more general case, 'long' is not guaranteed to handle numbers in
> range up to 18,997,161,173 that can happen in this test.

The number 18997161173 is odd.  The largest value reached is three
times that, plus 1, which is 56991483520.

> Something like int64_t would be safer.

Using unsigned long long is safer still, and easier, because there
is no need for hoop-jumping to print them out with printx.