Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Locals revisited
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 12:14:19 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <87semzmwok.fsf@nightsong.com>
References: <nnd$6218682b$184a5797@0b341edb9d03c6de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 20:14:21 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1c13a15b9ada2263b86959f5e7824ba5";
	logging-data="2526920"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18EGYDqo/eM/N0UHAHLJYIb"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:K2ZBw6KusYSPz0biKAgtj9VVah0=
	sha1:irwon3w32y088W0oGlc+XWngV6U=
Bytes: 1593

albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl writes:
> In hindsight my locals definition is not convincing, because carnal
> knowledge about the behaviour of the return stack is required.

It's ok if it's for a specific implementation.  But what I'm having
trouble seeing is how the locals get popped in case of an exception.  Do
you not need to implement something like (LOCAL) ?

> (I get 30 registers in RISCV that can serve as a stack pointer.)

In some models of the RISCV, only 14, I think.  And in almost all
models, 8 of them are more efficient to address than the rest, because
of the compressed instruction format.