From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ac02560f0af03a21
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-02 05:29:28 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!nwrdny02.gnilink.net.POSTED!0f19ed38!not-for-mail
From: "Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.lhota.adarose@verizon.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: 
 <pan.2003.12.26.10.37.14.290567@n_o_p_o_r_k_a_n_d_h_a_m.abyss2.demon.co.uk>
   <pan.2003.12.26.17.08.27.898789@n_o_p_o_r_k_a_n_d_h_a_m.abyss2.demon.co.uk>
 <pan.2003.12.26.17.27.26.494317@n_o_p_o_r_k_a_n_d_h_a_m.abyss2.demon.co.uk>
 <3fec7c21$0$4764$61fed72c@news.rcn.com> <lnekul8ewd.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>
 <4iBIb.8173$qS3.498@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>
 <1072883131.278899@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <tQCIb.1395$x34.387@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
 <1072891494.595791@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <R5FIb.23183$tY5.8488@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
 <1072899508.453543@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <aBGIb.1657$x34.18@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
 <1072906542.723974@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <3ff38b16$0$4759$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>
 <pan.2004.01.01.05.20.08.516433@n_o_p_o_r_k_a_n_d_h_a_m.abyss2.demon.co.uk>
 <bAXIb.28439$tY5.3073@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
 <3ff44baf$0$4754$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>
 <o6YIb.8353$x34.4946@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
 <3ff4ba22$0$4761$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>
 <G96Jb.30096$tY5.28719@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
Subject: Re: GNAT parameter passing, C-style?
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Message-ID: <XmeJb.16930$x34.155@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 13:29:27 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.203.242.46
X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net
X-Trace: nwrdny02.gnilink.net 1073050167 151.203.242.46 (Fri,
 02 Jan 2004 08:29:27 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 08:29:27 EST
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4039
Date: 2004-01-02T13:29:27+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Hyman Rosen" <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote in message
news:G96Jb.30096$tY5.28719@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
> Frank J. Lhota wrote:
> > Yes, but what about the callee?
>
> What *about* the calee? It sees the arguments the same
> way, with the first at the top of the stack and the others
> lower down. Come on, work it out for yourself. There's no
> difference between pushing from right to left, or reserving
> space then filling from left to right. The resulting picture
> in memory is the same.

OK, I get the picture. We're beyond the discussion of the convention, and
are now discussing how the implementation is implemented. Basically what
you're saying is that one can "process" arguments from left to right and get
the same effect as pushing the argurments from right to left. On that point,
I totally agree.