Re: recursive nested functions

"Gene" <gene.ressler@gmail.com> wrote in message
> On Jun 25, 1:30 pm, nojb <n...@uchicago.edu> wrote:


<snip>




> Check the literature on lambda lifting. Although the theory was
> worked out for functional languages, it works for imperative ones,
> too. You need to pass references around rather than values. Function
> pointers generally need to be "fat" i.e. to include references to all
> bound variables.




one doesn't necessarily need fat pointers.
for example, one typical architectures, such as x86, one can instead pass
around a function pointer to an in-memory object, which when called may in
turn call the true function passing the captured variables in addition to
the arguments.


this has the advantage that it can remain C ABI compatible.




> I'm not sure of the problem you are describing. It sounds like you
> are confusing dynamic and static scopes. Lambda lifting makes sense
> only in the context of static scopes. A function F that declares a
> variable X will still declare X in the lifted code. Calls to a
> function G originally nested within F will pass X (or a reference to
> it), and G will accept the reference. If G calls itself recursively,
> it passes the same reference to X it received. Same if it calls a
> nested function H that ultimately calls G.


yeah, I didn't respond originally as I couldn't make much sense of what was
being asked.


I thought mayve something different was being asked, and so left it to
others to try to respond.

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