Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!pa.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!jareth.enet.dec.com!edp
From: edp@jareth.enet.dec.com (Eric Postpischil (Always mount a scratch monkey.))
Newsgroups: comp.sys.handhelds
Subject: Re: CLEARing stack
Keywords: CLEAR
Message-ID: <19558@shlump.nac.dec.com>
Date: 29 Jan 91 16:09:11 GMT
References: <10535@jarthur.Claremont.EDU>
Sender: newsdaemon@shlump.nac.dec.com
Reply-To: edp@jareth.enet.dec.com (Eric Postpischil (Always mount a scratch monkey.))
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 15

In article <10535@jarthur.Claremont.EDU>, sburke@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Scott
Burke) writes:

>  1. There may be a large object on the stack, and if you want your code to
>     run in low memory conditions, it is a _really_ bad idea to stick those
>     1K GROBs (to pick an example) in a list and try to store it.

Why is that?  Supposing that you disable argument/stack saving temporarily and
convert the stack to a list to be stored in a variable, are extra copies of the
items on the stack created during this?  Or does the 48 just move them around?


				-- edp (Eric Postpischil)
				"Always mount a scratch monkey."
				edp@jareth.enet.dec.com