Timeline for Create a memory leak, without any fork bombs [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
62 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Feb 5, 2016 at 23:05 | history | notice added | Alex A. | Historical significance | |
| S Feb 5, 2016 at 23:05 | history | locked | Alex A. | ||
| S Feb 5, 2016 at 23:05 | history | closed | Alex A. | Not suitable for this site | |
| S Feb 5, 2016 at 23:05 | comment | added | Alex A. | I'm closing this question as off-topic because it's asking for, in some sense, malicious software, which we do not allow. | |
| Jul 6, 2014 at 19:59 | history | edited | George | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 13 characters in body |
| Jun 24, 2014 at 5:52 | answer | added | Riot | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 21, 2014 at 19:55 | vote | accept | George | ||
| Apr 21, 2014 at 19:53 | comment | added | George | I wonder if I should remove the 10 days part!! | |
| Apr 1, 2014 at 13:47 | answer | added | skibrianski | timeline score: 0 | |
| Mar 30, 2014 at 13:48 | answer | added | user4740 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Mar 27, 2014 at 0:13 | history | protected | CommunityBot | ||
| Mar 26, 2014 at 19:54 | comment | added | George | @hpsMouse. Closing is pressing the close button (the X in the top right corner). Killing it is going into task manager and clicking end task, or going into processes and ending the process | |
| Mar 26, 2014 at 16:53 | comment | added | hpsMouse | How do you define "merely closing the app"? Closing all windows belonging to the process, or must the process itself be terminated? What if the program runs entirely in the background? What's the difference between "closing the app" and "killing the program" then? | |
| Mar 25, 2014 at 12:29 | answer | added | Bob65536 | timeline score: 4 | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 18:50 | answer | added | gmatht | timeline score: 3 | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 18:23 | answer | added | bacchusbeale | timeline score: 0 | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 14:24 | answer | added | aschepler | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 0:35 | answer | added | berdario | timeline score: 8 | |
| Mar 23, 2014 at 6:25 | answer | added | gmatht | timeline score: 15 | |
| Mar 22, 2014 at 21:06 | history | edited | George | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 184 characters in body |
| Mar 22, 2014 at 19:59 | comment | added | George | @jpmc26. No. I mean you cannot use memory by starting threads so like you cant use for x in range(100000) to spawn loads of threads to take up memory. | |
| Mar 22, 2014 at 8:26 | comment | added | jpmc26 | By "must be single threaded", do you mean "must not explicitly start any threads?" As a comment on the current most popular answer notes, some language runtimes have multiple threads behind the scenes, which effectively excludes those languages from the challenge. Furthermore, @acbabis raises a valid point. I don't know of any languages where "closing the program" wouldn't at least stop the main thread from running. Without at least allowing threads opened in the background by standard libraries (such as GUI threads) or the runtime itself, this seems like an impossible challenge. | |
| S Mar 21, 2014 at 20:29 | history | edited | Jonathan Van Matre | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Copy edited. |
| S Mar 21, 2014 at 20:29 | history | suggested | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Copy edited. |
| Mar 21, 2014 at 20:09 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Mar 21, 2014 at 20:29 | |||||
| Mar 21, 2014 at 12:24 | answer | added | gmatht | timeline score: 4 | |
| Mar 21, 2014 at 9:54 | answer | added | Toothbrush | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 21, 2014 at 9:14 | answer | added | ST3 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Mar 21, 2014 at 2:25 | comment | added | user19562 | You can always install Windows... that'll give you several interesting memory leaks, some of which have been there a really long time. You can also run malloc's, and store into the memory location given to you by malloc, until it barfs up and gives you a 0.L as an error code ("Nil Pointer"), then store into location 0, and see how long the machine lives. Judging by how many "zero-stores" I have seen in many places, Microsoft and Apple run neck and neck with Nil pointer references. grin Dave Small | |
| Mar 21, 2014 at 1:41 | comment | added | user2357112 | Why specifically without fork bombs? Banning one technique is like saying "no Python" or "can't use BeOS". It just seems silly. | |
| Mar 20, 2014 at 10:26 | answer | added | aherve | timeline score: 6 | |
| Mar 20, 2014 at 0:15 | answer | added | Christopher King | timeline score: 3 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 21:06 | answer | added | foobar | timeline score: 37 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 20:22 | answer | added | Sylwester | timeline score: 16 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 20:05 | answer | added | cjfaure | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 17:50 | answer | added | ɲeuroburɳ | timeline score: 24 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 16:24 | answer | added | nobody | timeline score: 77 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 16:00 | history | edited | George | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 25 characters in body |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 15:54 | comment | added | George | @David. Thats fine, Garbage collection can be overridden for this. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 13:48 | answer | added | Clyde Lobo | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 12:37 | comment | added | David Wilkins | Is overriding garbage collection so that nothing happens a valid answer? | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 12:34 | answer | added | James_pic | timeline score: 72 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 12:29 | answer | added | n0la | timeline score: 6 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 10:02 | comment | added | orion | "Closing it should still make it hog memory." without spawning some secret processes this is not possible on unices unless you exploit some kernel memory leak or mess directly with the os. You'd need a windows platform (preferably win98 or older) to do that with a conventional code. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 8:54 | answer | added | Mukul Kumar | timeline score: 22 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 8:46 | comment | added | Mukul Kumar | @GeorgeH my previous comment was a troll (I apologize for that) See my answer which hangs computer in 2 second! Once started, your computer will hang so don't try! | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 8:15 | comment | added | George | @mniip. That's the whole point of the challenge. To make a difficult challenge. And doorknob. I wanted something different! ;) | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 7:37 | answer | added | AutomatedChaos | timeline score: 4 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 6:53 | answer | added | devnull | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 6:06 | answer | added | devnull | timeline score: 10 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 4:01 | comment | added | Braden Best | Just run firefox 26 with a few tabs open running flash for a half hour. It'll bring your computer to its knees. | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 2:22 | answer | added | marinus | timeline score: 8 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 1:02 | answer | added | Tony Ellis | timeline score: 13 | |
| Mar 19, 2014 at 0:13 | answer | added | Ismael Miguel | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 18, 2014 at 23:52 | answer | added | Mathieu Rodic | timeline score: 5 | |
| Mar 18, 2014 at 23:40 | comment | added | user10766 | Does writing an infinite string to a file count? | |
| Mar 18, 2014 at 23:30 | answer | added | Digital Trauma | timeline score: 27 | |
| Mar 18, 2014 at 22:58 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackCodeGolf/status/446058181643751426 | ||
| Mar 18, 2014 at 22:34 | comment | added | aebabis | I'm not sure if "Closing it should still make it hog memory" is compatible with "The application must be single threaded only." If no thread has a chunk of memory, the OS can take it back, right? | |
| Mar 18, 2014 at 22:32 | comment | added | Doorknob | Isn't this just while(1)malloc(999);? | |
| Mar 18, 2014 at 22:25 | comment | added | mniip | "Closing it should still make it hog memory" - if a program is a shell executable (like most of windows versions of scripting language interpreters are), closing its window will kill the program. | |
| Mar 18, 2014 at 22:17 | history | asked | George | CC BY-SA 3.0 |