[PRL] MSFT gives Joe Marshall kudos, decides Appel was right after all

[John Clements]

On Jun 1, 2006, at 9:44 AM, Joe Marshall wrote:

>>
>> 2.  Elsewhere, one of the CLR bigshots says that the problem is not
>> continuations, it's the stack itself, and the stack is a bad idea,  
>> after
>> all.
>> http://www.bluebytesoftware.com/blog/ 
>> PermaLink,guid,db077b7d-47ed-4f2a-8300-44203f514638.aspx
>>
>
> So they've caught up to Appel in 1987.
>
> How long until they catch up with Miller and Rozas 1994?
>
> @techreport{ miller94garbage,
>    author = "James S. Miller and Guillermo J. Rozas",
>    title = "Garbage Collection is Fast, but a Stack is Faster",
>    number = "AIM-1462",
>    pages = "37",
>    year = "1994",
>    url = "citeseer.ist.psu.edu/miller94garbage.html" }
>
> (Weird, since Miller is one of the .NET architects!)

Well, talk about preaching to the choir, but...

The problem is not the stack, per se; it's the bogus notion that you  
push on entry and pop on exit.  When people talk about "the stack,"  
they're usually not just referring to the notion of a stack but also  
to a particular pattern of use. (cf. Clinger 1998, etc. etc.)

I claim that we need to popularize a term that distinguishes AND  
DEPRECATES the current pattern of usage; "stone-age stacks," or  
"primitive stacks," or "blind push."

John Clements