Rust updates

[Walter Bright]

On 7/11/2012 9:57 AM, David Piepgrass wrote:
> On Sunday, 8 July 2012 at 19:28:11 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 7/8/2012 6:49 AM, bearophile wrote:
>>> I think in Go the function stack is segmented and growable as in Go. This saves
>>> RAM if you need a small stack, and avoids stack overflows where lot of stack is
>>> needed.
>>
>> The trouble with segmented stacks are:
>>
>> 1. they have a significant runtime penalty
> Why?

Extra instructions generated for each function.


>> 2. interfacing to C code becomes problematic
> Isn't it possible to auto-commit new pages when C code needs it? I see that
> *moving* the stack would be a problem unless you have a means to adjust all
> pointers that point into the stack. If you need to call C code in 32-bit, you'd
> have to specify a maximum stack size.

There's no way to predict how much stack arbitrary C code will use.