Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!uw-june!pardo
From: pardo@june.cs.washington.edu (David Keppel)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Recursion
Message-ID: <4443@june.cs.washington.edu>
Date: 12 Mar 88 06:10:16 GMT
References: <25284@cca.CCA.COM> <700@l.cc.purdue.edu> <505@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> <17351@glacier.STANFORD.EDU> <704@l.cc.purdue.edu> <3980@ihlpf.ATT.COM>
Reply-To: pardo@uw-june.UUCP (David Keppel)
Followup-To: comp.lang.misc
Organization: U of Washington, Computer Science, Seattle
Lines: 15
Summary: heaps more general than stacks

In article <3980@ihlpf.ATT.COM> nevin1@ihlpf.UUCP (00704a-Liber,N.J.) writes:
>The only model that I know of that supports recursion is a stack.

Recursion can also be supported with heaps.  Many versions of Lisp and
all versions of Smalltalk allow spaghetti stacks (usually, but not always
obeys stack discipline).  Spaghetti stacks are implemented using heaps, or
at least they (transparently) copy frames from the stack into to
heap-allocated space when they are going to live after their parents'
destruction.

Heaps are usually less efficient and more general than stacks.

Followups to comp.lang.misc

	;-D on  (Gimme a *heap* o' them stacks!)  Pardo