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.