Re: Framed Stack vs. Two Stack Architecture

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
25 Apr 2006 10:12:52 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: Framed Stack vs. Two Stack Architecture mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de (Dmitry A. Kazakov) (2006-04-22)
Re: Framed Stack vs. Two Stack Architecture DrDiettrich@compuserve.de (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2006-04-23)
Re: Framed Stack vs. Two Stack Architecture gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2006-04-23)
Re: Framed Stack vs. Two Stack Architecture anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2006-04-23)
Re: Framed Stack vs. Two Stack Architecture dot@dotat.at (Tony Finch) (2006-04-23)
Re: Framed Stack vs. Two Stack Architecture brennie@dcsi.net.au (2006-04-23)
Re: Framed Stack vs. Two Stack Architecture dot@dotat.at (Tony Finch) (2006-04-25)
Re: Framed Stack vs. Two Stack Architecture vladimir.d.lushnikov@gmail.com (Vladimir Lushnikov) (2006-04-28)
Re: Framed Stack vs. Two Stack Architecture eliotm@pacbell.net (Eliot Miranda) (2006-05-01)
Re: Framed Stack vs. Two Stack Architecture eliotm@pacbell.net (Eliot Miranda) (2006-05-03)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 25 Apr 2006 10:12:52 -0400
Organization: dotat labs
References: 06-04-126 06-04-130 06-04-144 06-04-146
Keywords: storage
Posted-Date: 25 Apr 2006 10:12:52 EDT

brennie@dcsi.net.au wrote:
>Tony Finch wrote:
>> On the other hand, if you like continuation-passing style, one stack
>> seems to make more sense.
>
>In an information gathering exercise, I am asking for your reasoning
>for this stance.


It's usual in CPS to treat return addresses just like any other argument.


Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <dot@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/
SOUTHEAST ICELAND: WESTERLY 4 OR 5, BACKING SOUTHWESTERLY 7 TO SEVERE GALE 9.
RAIN. MODERATE OCCASIONALLY POOR.


Post a followup to this message

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