Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!dayton!joe
From: joe@dayton.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Minix and compiler models
Message-ID: <384@dayton.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Feb-87 10:01:28 EST
Article-I.D.: dayton.384
Posted: Fri Feb  6 10:01:28 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Feb-87 01:17:07 EST
References: <383@dayton.UUCP> <13647@ti-csl.CSNET>
Reply-To: joe@dayton.UUCP (Joseph P. Larson)
Organization: Dayton-Hudson Dept. Store Co.
Lines: 24

In article <13647@ti-csl.CSNET> herman@ti-csl.CSNET (Herman Schuurman) writes:
>in article <383@dayton.UUCP>, joe@dayton.UUCP (Joseph P. Larson) says:
>> I always thought stacks grew up.  I think (and hope!) that you've got the
>> two reversed!  ("Where, or where have the standards gone?  Where, oh where
>> may they be?")
>
>Sorry, but stacks in general grow downwards in memory.  Just look at the
>description of the PUSH and POP instructions on various processors.  They
>usually pre-decrement the stack pointer on PUSH, and post-increment on POP.

Giggle.  *THINK* about it.  If you are PUSHing something and you
pre-decrement the stack pointer, it is going to point UPWARDS in
memory.

Using Macro-11:

		movl	arg, -(SP)			; push
		movl	(SP)+, arg			; pop
	
Pre-decrement of SP for a push makes the stack grow up...
-- 
UUCP: rutgers!dayton!joe                Dayton Hudson Department Store Company
ATT : (612) 375-3537                    Joe Larson/MIS 1060
(standard disclaimer...)                700 on the Mall      Mpls, Mn. 55408