Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!hplabs!otter.hpl.hp.com!hpltoad!cdollin!kers From: kers@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Chris Dollin) Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Subject: Re: avoiding the retention of trash Message-ID: Date: 13 Jun 91 11:07:51 GMT References: Sender: news@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Usenet News Administrator) Distribution: comp Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK. Lines: 12 In-Reply-To: kers@hplb.hpl.hp.com's message of 13 Jun 91 12:02:31 Nntp-Posting-Host: cdollin.hpl.hp.com I forgot to add another approach: [5] Don't re-use stack frames: allocate fresh ones from the heap. Cost: more GC (because of the stack-frame turnover), may need fancier GC to cope, and must take care about not-yet-initialised variables anyway. (I can't rely on virtual memory hardware to help; not all my targets *have* virtual memory, or even multiple address spaces.) -- Regards, Kers | "Once I would have been glad to have made your acquaintance Renaissance: | Now I feel the danger brought about by circumstance."