Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!amdcad!decwrl!sun!gnu
From: gnu@sun.uucp (John Gilmore)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: C stack frame > 64K
Message-ID: <1837@sun.uucp>
Date: Tue, 4-Dec-84 01:25:40 EST
Article-I.D.: sun.1837
Posted: Tue Dec  4 01:25:40 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 5-Dec-84 01:01:47 EST
References: <18092@arizona.UUCP> <6255@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 15

> I have recently had some practical experience with this issue.  On the
> Gould UTX-32 system (and I believe on IBM 370s too), the architecture
> rather strongly encouraged the C/UNIX implementors to use a relatively
> small chunk of address space for the run-time stack...
>            ...I imagine someone has written code that needs more, but
> they have already severely limited their target machine choices.

The Sun C compiler used to have this restriction.  We fixed it.  It was easy
(on the 68000).  Hey, all you people who "severely limited their target
machine choices" -- your code will run fine on Suns!

It's hard to believe a serious IBM mainframe Unix port would limit
stack size to 64K out of a 16MB (larger on newer models) linear address
space.  Especially since "stacks" on a 370 are a software abstraction --
there is no hardware support for them.