Xref: utzoo comp.unix.questions:30087 comp.unix.internals:2487 comp.unix.programmer:1498 comp.lang.c:37955 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!olivea!tymix!cirrusl!ss168!dhesi From: dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.programmer,comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Unix Stack Frame Questions Message-ID: <3035@cirrusl.UUCP> Date: 4 Apr 91 19:20:49 GMT References: <125@epic.epic.com> <3465@unisoft.UUCP> <19157@rpp386.cactus.org> Sender: news@cirrusl.UUCP Distribution: na Organization: Cirrus Logic Inc. Lines: 17 In <19157@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) writes: >>But a stack frame seems to be the most efficient way of dealing with >>calls and returns. >No, there are =many= better ways. BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.... A "stack frame" is the ONLY way of dealing with calls and returns *if they may be recursive*. *Where* the stack frame lies is another question. Part of it may be in registers. It's still a stack frame. -- Rahul Dhesi UUCP: oliveb!cirrusl!dhesi