This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
The first documented use of a saguaro stack that I'm aware of was on the Burroughs B6500 [1] [2], where the stacks for various tasks in a program formed a tree structure, with links to stack frames on the parent stacks for nested blocks.
References
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |separator=
ignored (
help)
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |separator=
ignored (
help)
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul ( talk) 16:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
We have an inconsistency I think. This page says:
Examples of languages that use spaghetti stacks are:
- ...
- Languages where the execution stack can be inspected and modified at runtime such as Smalltalk
...and on the other hand, Closure (computer science) says:
Since that call has already returned and the Smalltalk method invocation model does not follow the spaghetti stack discipline to allow multiple returns, this operation results in an error.
I don't know enough about Smalltalk to tell which one is right. -- Doradus ( talk) 12:34, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
I've tried to "disambiguate" a citation to a volume of conference proceedings by guessing which paper might have been meant. The current citation, in essence, cannot be verified. The citation was introduced here, and my change is here. Subsequently, I moved the citation to another sentence. In fact, the paper does describe "kind-of" the same data structure, but with quite a few subtle variations (in fact, what the next paragraph describes is closer to Sec. 4.1, the "garbage-collection" strategy, rather than a spaghetti stack; spaghetti stacks are described by the cited paper [1] as using their own implementation of garbage collection.
However, I don't have time to rewrite this page based on the cited article, and it's just one article — but I don't have time to survey articles on the topic.
-- Blaisorblade ( talk) 18:35, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
I've only seen references to cactus stacks as saguaro, and had never seen the spelling sahuaro until now. Is that a typo, and, if not, shouldn't the article use the more common spelling? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul ( talk) 14:58, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
I've seen "spaghetti stack" mentioned in literature as a specific implementation technique for "cactus stacks"/"saguaro stacks". In other words, a "spaghetti stack" would be a type of "cactus stack", so it would be better to use "cactus stack" first.
But I don't fully grasp the misunderstandings that led to how the article was written in its current form, so I'll refrain from editing until I am more versed in this topic. However, a regular C compiler does definitely not create a spaghetti stack (a C-- compiler might, but that's a whole different language). Johan Hanson ( talk) 10:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
The first documented use of a saguaro stack that I'm aware of was on the Burroughs B6500 [1] [2], where the stacks for various tasks in a program formed a tree structure, with links to stack frames on the parent stacks for nested blocks.
References
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |separator=
ignored (
help)
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |separator=
ignored (
help)
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul ( talk) 16:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
We have an inconsistency I think. This page says:
Examples of languages that use spaghetti stacks are:
- ...
- Languages where the execution stack can be inspected and modified at runtime such as Smalltalk
...and on the other hand, Closure (computer science) says:
Since that call has already returned and the Smalltalk method invocation model does not follow the spaghetti stack discipline to allow multiple returns, this operation results in an error.
I don't know enough about Smalltalk to tell which one is right. -- Doradus ( talk) 12:34, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
I've tried to "disambiguate" a citation to a volume of conference proceedings by guessing which paper might have been meant. The current citation, in essence, cannot be verified. The citation was introduced here, and my change is here. Subsequently, I moved the citation to another sentence. In fact, the paper does describe "kind-of" the same data structure, but with quite a few subtle variations (in fact, what the next paragraph describes is closer to Sec. 4.1, the "garbage-collection" strategy, rather than a spaghetti stack; spaghetti stacks are described by the cited paper [1] as using their own implementation of garbage collection.
However, I don't have time to rewrite this page based on the cited article, and it's just one article — but I don't have time to survey articles on the topic.
-- Blaisorblade ( talk) 18:35, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
I've only seen references to cactus stacks as saguaro, and had never seen the spelling sahuaro until now. Is that a typo, and, if not, shouldn't the article use the more common spelling? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul ( talk) 14:58, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
I've seen "spaghetti stack" mentioned in literature as a specific implementation technique for "cactus stacks"/"saguaro stacks". In other words, a "spaghetti stack" would be a type of "cactus stack", so it would be better to use "cactus stack" first.
But I don't fully grasp the misunderstandings that led to how the article was written in its current form, so I'll refrain from editing until I am more versed in this topic. However, a regular C compiler does definitely not create a spaghetti stack (a C-- compiler might, but that's a whole different language). Johan Hanson ( talk) 10:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)