Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why?

haberg@math.su.se (Hans Aberg)
14 May 2005 01:10:43 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
The C Stack in interpreters - why? clearm@comcast.net (2005-05-13)
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com (Peter Flass) (2005-05-14)
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? haberg@math.su.se (2005-05-14)
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? clearm@comcast.net (2005-05-14)
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2005-05-14)
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2005-05-14)
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? haberg@math.su.se (2005-05-14)
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2005-05-14)
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? Marko.Makela@HUT.FI (Marko =?ISO-8859-1?Q?M=E4kel=E4?=) (2005-05-14)
[7 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

From: haberg@math.su.se (Hans Aberg)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 14 May 2005 01:10:43 -0400
Organization: Mathematics
References: 05-05-072
Keywords: C, practice

clearm@comcast.net wrote:


> I am trying to understand why the C stack is used in interpreters
> rather than an explicity built stack on the heap?


In part this may depend on the OS. On UNIX computers, the function
parameter stack is put in its own memory space, and thus there is are
no growth problems. Building ones own stack can only be motivated if
it is more efficient than the one supplied by the OS.


--
    Hans Aberg


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.