From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 11:58:15 -0200 Message-ID: From: Iruata Souza To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] 8l(1) PUSH/POP Topicbox-Message-UUID: 974423b4-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:24 AM, erik quanstrom wro= te: >> what is the reason behind 8l(1) not allowing unbalanced PUSH/POP? > > i'm not sure of the original reason, but unbalanced > push/pop could conflict with the linker's automatic > stack management. =C2=A0also, i'm not sure what the > general application would be unless you want to do > continuations. > > what's the application? > > if you're setting up a first process, i believe you can > still modify the stack pointer directly and do a stack- > relative move. > the application is a pbs. for now i'm doing a stack-relative move, but i'd rather use a pop. disabling the restriction has shown no regressions in the pbs yet. and i couldn't seem to find the same restriction in vl(1) for example. iru