From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <200207191836.TAA08412@cthulhu.dircon.co.uk> Subject: Re: [9fans] useful language extension, or no? In-Reply-To: <979deae73cfef9ae533f1d3d39e81f2e@plan9.bell-labs.com> from David Gordon Hogan at "Jul 19, 2002 02:22:17 pm" To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu From: Digby Tarvin MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 19:36:43 +0100 Topicbox-Message-UUID: d2fe78ec-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 > > Why not just get the compiler to generate the assembly language > > for you. > > My heart wasn't into it. > > > It is interesting that the current compiler lets you do it (my old > > BSD system won't swallow it) but I can't see any attempt to actually > > execute any code on the stack. > > Yeah, I'm running the ast-optimiser-branch gcc by default, and it does > use trampolines. I think it's quasi- based on gcc 3.0. > > Before I go on another wild goose chase, what version specifically > do you mean by "current"? > Sorry - I should really have said 'more current' or 'recent'. It was SuSE Linux 7.3, which comes with gcc-2.95.3-124 As I have since learned, a call to the nested function via a pointer does indeed generate the jump to code on the stack.... Regards, DigbyT -- Digby R. S. Tarvin digbyt@acm.org http://www.cthulhu.dircon.co.uk