Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!batcomputer!llenroc!cornell!uw-beaver!milton!ogicse!pdxgate!parsely!percy!data!kend From: kend@data.UUCP (Ken Dickey) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re^2: A comment on language wars. Message-ID: <461@data.UUCP> Date: 14 Mar 91 22:06:23 GMT References: <2400032@otter.hpl.hp.com> Organization: Microcosm, Beaverton, OR Lines: 24 Warning: comment recursion limit reached... markf@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Mark Friedman) writes: >In article <-K.9TE3@xds13.ferranti.com> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter >da Silva) writes: > In article > markf@zurich.ai.mit.edu writes: > > It is not necessary for the running of the procedure. One could > > in principle build a non-gc version of the system which did not > > require that information. > So the procedure is actually built dynamically at runtime? >Yes. But note that the code for the procedure is built once; only the >environment needs to be built at runtime, assuming that any >environment needs to be built at all (the compiler may determine that >some procedures don't need an environment). Note also that in the absence of first-class continuations (i.e. control jumps limited to catch/throw, setjump/longjump), you can always build such environments on the stack. -Ken Dickey kend@data.uucp