From: Robert Klemme <bob.news@...>
Date: 2004-08-26T23:55:36+09:00
Subject: Re: is the ruby interpreter stackless?


"Lennon Day-Reynolds" <rcoder@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:5d4c6124040824184528f7801c@mail.gmail.com...
> Ruby uses the C stack; its continuations are implemented using
> setjmp/longjmp. That makes the Ruby API very natural to use from C,
> but unfortunately, also means that the stack limits of the native
> platform apply, and that Ruby's continuations are no faster than full
> native SMP threads.

Is that really the case?  I mean, this doesn't look like "natural" stack
depth limit:

$ ruby -e 'def foo() foo end; begin; foo; rescue Exception => e; puts
e.backtrace.size; end'
13633

Or does each single call use up so much stack space?  I did a simple
recursive function in C and it didn't core prior to level 129536.  So
basically that would mean that Ruby uses 10 times the stack space per
invocation.

Kind regards

    robert