Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!know!samsung!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!iuvax!bomgard
From: bomgard@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Tim Bomgardner)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Life after free?
Keywords: free malloc
Message-ID: <62167@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>
Date: 4 Oct 90 15:34:36 GMT
Distribution: comp
Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington
Lines: 14

In article <2539@cirrusl.UUCP>, dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes:
} In <26770@mimsy.umd.edu> chris@mimsy.umd.edu (Chris Torek) writes:
}    The compiler is free to, as Ron Natalie once put it, stuff arguments
}    into an envelope and mail them off to the function being called...
}
} This idea has always seemed so quaint, but I wonder if it really works
} for pointers?
}

It does work, altho there is additional overhead.  This is exactly how
remote procedure calls (RPCs) are implemented.  Note that the "envelope"
is usually called a "packet" in this context, and while the compiler
COULD do it, it's usually handled elsewhere (i.e., library procedures
called "stubs").