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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,ae395e5c11de7bc9
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!193.201.147.78.MISMATCH!feeder.news-service.com!188.40.43.213.MISMATCH!feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Warren <ve3wwg@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: segfault with large-ish array with GNAT
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 20:38:49 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <Xns9D40A957BAF34WarrensBlatherings@188.40.43.245>
References: 
 <642ddf8b-1d45-4f74-83ad-2c755040ca33@k24g2000pro.googlegroups.com>
 <cf178987-c893-4e93-83b7-c86b6aeeac48@q15g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
 <4ba13454$0$6720$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <ac4bed10-f655-4fa5-8891-2967ba4388a0@k6g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
 <Xns9D3F84CEB288DWarrensBlatherings@85.214.113.135>
 <6b9abbbd-2d5e-4e80-b353-fc4d1ccd2963@q23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
Injection-Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 20:38:49 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: feeder.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="9f8M0iN5t54V+4DF/iqO8g";
	logging-data="32637"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX182mZh6j8MIyRqqgCKWAHbHOPLI5CKiAIU="
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
X-Face: 
 &6@]C2>ZS=NM|HE-^zWuryN#Z/2_.s9E|G&~DRi|sav9{E}XQJb*\_>=a5"q]\%A;5}LKP][1mA{gZ,Q!j
Cancel-Lock: sha1:TdJcWMGAuQxQXN+iWlCwUKd00Bc=
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:10645
Date: 2010-03-19T20:38:49+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Maciej Sobczak expounded in news:6b9abbbd-2d5e-4e80-b353-fc4d1ccd2963
@q23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:

> On 18 Mar, 18:03, Warren <ve3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> With the new focus on parallel cores etc., I've often pondered
>> what a future CPU without a stack might look like. Imagine
>> a CPU that somehow in microcode was able to do a fast-malloc
>> of a stack frame
> 
> There is no need to do that in microcode - the compiler decides what
> does it mean to call a subprogram and what does it mean to allocate
> the "frame", so you might simply have a compiler that implements these
> concepts in terms of a dynamically allocated linked list.
> I vaguely remember reading about a C compiler that did exactly that a
> while ago - but I fail to find it in Google due to the noise from
> billions of tutorials with stacks and lists. :-)
> Maciej Sobczak * www.inspirel.com

Were you thinking Cilk (or Cilk++)?  I saw this in passing this
afternoon. One reference indicates a Cilk project existing since
'94 using gcc. Looks like good reading material for this weekend.

Warren