3 ms·

That sounds very inefficient given that every processor of which I am familiar has built-in support for a stack. Could you elaborate a bit more on your approach

• Someone 15y ago
  For the curious: typically, pure RISC CPUs will have 'support for a stack' in the sense that it is not too hard to implement Algol-like languages on them, but not a stack proper. For example, neither PowerPC nor MIPS have designated stack pointer registers. As a consequence, they do not have a 'return from subroutine' instruction, they do not have pop or push, etc. ABIs will define a stack pointer, but if you control the hardware, you can use any register you want, none at all, have separate data and return address stacks, etc. Also, for a truly stackless CPU, look at system 370 (and, I guess, most other machines predating Algol)