From: Francis Cianfrocca <garbagecat10@...>
Date: 2007-04-20T19:52:05+09:00
Subject: Re: IRHG - One Stack-Frame Pushed onto Stack for each Function Call??

------=_Part_134649_2038866.1177066323320
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On 4/20/07, Charles Thornton <ceo@hawthorne-press.com> wrote:
>
> Each Ruby Function Call produces a Stack Frame, and
> said Frame poped on Function Exit?
>
>

I don't know about Ruby, but every Algol-derived language does that,
including C. That's why, in the early days, people complained that C wasn't
as fast as Fortran. :-)

(Speaking of Fortran, RIP John Backus.)

------=_Part_134649_2038866.1177066323320
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On 4/20/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Charles Thornton</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:ceo@hawthorne-press.com">ceo@hawthorne-press.com</a>&gt; wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Each Ruby Function Call produces a Stack Frame, and<br>said Frame poped on Function Exit?<br><br></blockquote></div><br><br>I don&#39;t know about Ruby, but every Algol-derived language does that, including C. That&#39;s why, in the early days, people complained that C wasn&#39;t as fast as Fortran. :-)
<br><br>(Speaking of Fortran, RIP John Backus.)<br>

------=_Part_134649_2038866.1177066323320--