# Should a command line argument for increasing memory limits count towards byte/character count?

Most Java interpreters have a predefined memory limit. However, it's a -X setting - an implementation specific setting.

With C, the call stack is usually heavily limited. There's usually a compiler setting to increase this limit. This is implementation-specific and as far as the C spec is concerned, there's no call stack limit.

Should implementation-specific options to increase the memory limit count towards the byte/character count? In other words, should limitations of the physical world count towards the byte count?

• In many C implementations, the stack limit can be set at runtime (it's specified by the operating system, and there's often a way to tune it). That means that it wouldn't need to be set at compile time. Java is similar; the -X flag isn't given to javac (the compiler), but rather to java (the runtime). In this sense it's a bit different from the typical compiler flag.
– user62131
Dec 3 '16 at 2:23

Unless the challenge specifically says otherwise, if a solution requires a wider integer type, a higher recursion limit, a bigger stack limit, more bytes of RAM than there are atoms in the observable universe, etc. for some/most/all of the test cases, you don't even need the -X flag, so you don't have to add it to your byte count.