Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!news-out.readnews.com!news-xxxfer.readnews.com!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED!nerds-end From: glen herrmannsfeldt Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: Is multi-level function return possible? Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:01:20 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 19 Sender: news@iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <14-03-058@comp.compilers> References: <14-03-020@comp.compilers> <14-03-022@comp.compilers> <14-03-025@comp.compilers> <14-03-030@comp.compilers> <14-03-044@comp.compilers> <14-03-046@comp.compilers> <14-03-047@comp.compilers> <14-03-048@comp.compilers> <14-03-053@comp.compilers> <14-03-057@comp.compilers> NNTP-Posting-Host: news.iecc.com X-Trace: miucha.iecc.com 1395694714 29803 2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970 (24 Mar 2014 20:58:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@iecc.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:58:34 +0000 (UTC) Keywords: C, history, comment Posted-Date: 24 Mar 2014 16:58:34 EDT X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:1180 (snip on C compilers, where our moderator wrote) > [We do forget that Ritchie's C compiler ran in 12K bytes of RAM, > two passes plus assembler, and generated quite respectable code > for the PDP-11. -John] I wonder how that compares to the PL/I (F) compiler in 44K? Not that you would want to run it in 44K, but rumors are that it was designed to, and will do it. At the end of every compilation, it tells the minimum region that will allow it to keep the symbol table in memory. -- glen [The F meant it was supposed to run on a 64K machine, so 44K of available core sounds about right. PL/I D squeezed a PL/I subset into a 16K machine. -John]