From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4F14846C.4040706@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 15:11:24 -0500
From: "Joel C. Salomon" <joelcsalomon@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:9.0) Gecko/20111229 Thunderbird/9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: 9fans@9fans.net
References: <CAJ1xhMUwAqtCmJSh3xUVVWS0fhAj4py2LtMfbeVuai2k2o3hzg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOw7k5ifn8knOApHOCY5ZM-8TDJaXKPReHAhB-ZYgSxYFRi7Rw@mail.gmail.com>
	<AAF0C6B4-379A-40C3-97C8-F4A661325359@bitblocks.com>
	<CAE9W7-gXhbmmVw-o6fwTJtr6KNhdmiow3_p-S8=5hz21X7i1uA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CFE0D78F-3C9A-4DB5-A3F2-13A8FC54BD74@bitblocks.com>
In-Reply-To: <CFE0D78F-3C9A-4DB5-A3F2-13A8FC54BD74@bitblocks.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] assembly syntax in plan 9
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5e0a30e6-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On 01/16/2012 02:03 PM, Bakul Shah wrote:
> On Jan 16, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Greg Comeau <comeauat9fans@gmail.com> wrote:
>> What we do in problematic cases with Comeau is to generate code to
>> arrange for the allocation of the VLA on the heap.  I'm not saying
>> this is perfect, but at least it gets the feature implementable and up
>> and running as "a portable implementation" versus perhaps not being
>> able to implement it at all on some platforms.
>
> How do you deal with longjmp?

I recall reading the source for a (mostly-) portable alloca() that
checked where on the call-stack is was invoked from and released memory
for any alloca() invocation from lower on the stack.  (The allocations
themselves were on the heap.)

--Joel