From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Content-Type: text/plain
MIME-Version: 1.0 (NeXT Mail 3.3ciscupdate v148.2.1)
From: arisawa@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] useful language extension, or no?
References: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0207170803450.16167-100000@athena><20020717134908.6cd4fcdb.spam@broster.co.uk><Pine.LNX.4.30.0207170803450.16167-100000@athena>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20020717085952.035b24c8@mail.real.com>
Message-Id: <20020717222200.7C97C19ACF@mail.cse.psu.edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 07:21:54 +0900
Topicbox-Message-UUID: cf500792-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

Hello,

>        for (x = 1 => { /* initialisation */ };
>                x < num => { /* termination */ };
>                x++ => { /* body */ };
>        );
>
Why not ?:
	x=1;
	while(x<num){
		x++;
	}

By the way, GNU C compiler allows nested function definition.
To do that, some of machine codes are put into stack.
It may cause security problem to be executed machine codes
in statck.
Some years ago I tested Plan9 (2nd edition) whether stack of
Plan9 are executable or not. The answer was YES.
So I have a qauestion:
Is it unavoidable machine codes in stack are executable?

My memory is faded. Forgive me if I make a mistake.

Kenji Arisawa