Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe

Dan Sugalski wrote:

> At 3:27 PM +0100 10/29/02, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> 
> ... Can we really 
>> have e.g. odd aligned PMCs on stack? I don't think so. Or am I still 
>> missing something?
> 
> 
> There was some indication back when this was first implemented that the 
> i386, at least when running windows, could have odd-aligned pointers in 
> stack-allocated data. Nobody was 100% sure, but better safe than not, at 
> least until someone can say definitively that we're being too cautious.

Then lets first test my patch(es) (in a different followup) on all 
plattforms. If i386/Win really fails, we make some #ifdef.

life.pasm gens 270 => 403 is an argument ;-)

leo

• [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Jason Gloudon
• RE: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Garrett Goebel
• Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Jason Gloudon
• Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Leopold Toetsch
• Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Dan Sugalski
• Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Leopold Toetsch
• Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Dan Sugalski
• Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Leopold Toetsch
• Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Jason Gloudon
• Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Leopold Toetsch
• Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Leopold Toetsch
• Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Dan Sugalski
• Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Leopold Toetsch
• Re: [perl #18127] [PATCH] Implicit stack direction probe by Dan Sugalski