Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!mephisto!gatech!kd4nc!rbdc!mitch
From: mitch@rbdc.UUCP (Mitch Berry)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: C on the apple
Message-ID: <996@rbdc.UUCP>
Date: 1 Feb 90 01:43:26 GMT
References: <6695@wpi.wpi.edu> <12647@cbnewsd.ATT.COM> <6761@wpi.wpi.edu> <PNAKADA.90Jan15232204@pnakada.oracle.com> <10381@microsoft.UUCP> <12046@smoke.BRL.MIL> <17437@athertn.Atherton.COM> <12054@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Reply-To: mitch@rbdc.UUCP (Mitch Berry)
Organization: Thrashing Rage @ RBDC Public Access UNIX
Lines: 6

In article <12054@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>activation record.  The 6502 hardware stack is too small for serious
>C applications even if it were used only to hold return addresses.

What about the 65c02? or is it just a slightly souped up 6502b...i dont
know about many of the differences of the 6502 & 65c02....