From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: stack size info Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:00:36 -0400 Message-ID: References: <32610487.225511174576772062.JavaMail.www@wwinf4103> <857it9m911.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1174665661 1391 80.91.229.12 (23 Mar 2007 16:01:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 16:01:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: alinsoar@voila.fr, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: ttn@gnuvola.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 23 17:00:51 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HUmC7-0007Wt-Fk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 17:00:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HUmE2-0002Hr-61 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 11:02:46 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HUmDy-0002Ez-6P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:02:42 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HUmDw-0002En-83 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:02:41 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HUmDw-0002Ek-3T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 11:02:40 -0500 Original-Received: from tomts40.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.97] helo=tomts40-srv.bellnexxia.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HUmC0-0007NL-K4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:00:40 -0400 Original-Received: from pastel.home ([70.55.83.113]) by tomts40-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.13 201-253-122-130-113-20050324) with ESMTP id <20070323160036.PULE1624.tomts40-srv.bellnexxia.net@pastel.home> for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:00:36 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 1E4C37F48; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:00:36 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Thien-Thi Nguyen's message of "Fri\, 23 Mar 2007 11\:01\:32 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.95 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Solaris 8 (1) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:68408 Archived-At: > I don't think so. My guess is "The maximum stack size this function > needs for execution, disregarding further (including recursive) > function calls as those extend the stack on their own." > i'm inclined to leave the docs alone. the node's entire context is a > single function and thus the STACKSIZE element of the byte-code function > object pertains to a single function call. > however, if pressed, i will suggest: > The maximum stack size this function might need when called. > "might" because it is possible that any particular call uses less than > that amount. "when called" addresses recursion. Maybe it could be called a "stack frame". And I'd use the word "upper bound" rather than maximum. Also I'd use the word "use" rather than "need". Stefan