Xref: utzoo comp.unix.questions:30197 comp.unix.internals:2507 comp.unix.programmer:1530 comp.lang.c:38063
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!pacbell.com!iggy.GW.Vitalink.COM!widener!ukma!psuvax1!news
From: schwartz@groucho.cs.psu.edu (Scott Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.programmer,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Unix Stack Frame Questions
Message-ID: <6!5Gi-rk1@cs.psu.edu>
Date: 9 Apr 91 03:46:40 GMT
References: <125@epic.epic.com> <GOEHRING.91Mar25113709@gnu.ai.mit.edu>
	<3465@unisoft.UUCP> <19157@rpp386.cactus.org> <3035@cirrusl.UUCP>
	<KERS.91Apr8095747@cdollin.hpl.hp.com>
Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet)
Distribution: na
Organization: PSU CS
Lines: 8
In-Reply-To: kers@hplb.hpl.hp.com's message of 8 Apr 91 08:57:47 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: groucho.cs.psu.edu


kers@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Chris Dollin) writes:
   Does calling it a stack frame make it a stack frame? It might be
   just a record in the heap. Whether we call that a ``stack frame''
   or not seems to be a matter of taste. 

"Activation record" is probably a better (more general) name for what
is being discused.