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) |
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? marcov@stack.nl (Marco van de Voort) (2005-05-14) |
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2005-05-15) |
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? gene@abhost.us (Gene Wirchenko) (2005-05-15) |
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2005-05-15) |
Re: The C Stack in interpreters - why? gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2005-05-16) |
[2 later articles] |
From: | nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | 14 May 2005 16:54:25 -0400 |
Organization: | University of Cambridge, England |
References: | 05-05-072 05-05-073 05-05-084 |
Keywords: | C, code, history, comment |
Posted-Date: | 14 May 2005 16:54:25 EDT |
>[Are there really systems with a hardware stack that C doesn't use?
>I've never seen one. -John]
There certainly were. I am pretty sure that at least one of the
VAX ones fell into that category.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
[Hmmn. The Vax certainly did have the world's most heavyweight
call-and-set-up-a-stack-frame-and-a-lot-of-other-stuff instruction. I
can easily believe that a C compiler would use the lighter weight JSB
rather than CALLS, but it's still on the R14 hardware stack. -John]
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.