From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <775b8d190802261446y2c1b9db3ka8cbf33e70c6ea55@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 09:46:47 +1100
From: "Bruce Ellis" <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Non-stack-based calling conventions
In-Reply-To: <45e92356e3defb6b263dfbb888fb6746@coraid.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <47C48BE9.6090605@proweb.co.uk>
	<45e92356e3defb6b263dfbb888fb6746@coraid.com>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 639c3396-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

Dis on a Chip is not stack based.  There are no stacks at all.
A very real advantage is that there are hence no restartable
faults.  If my memory serves me right this was the reason that
the C compiler for the Cray XMP had segmented stacks.
(A call would check if there was enough left in the current
segment and if not malloc and link another segment - yes it
was fast enough to get away with this.)

brucee