3 Feb
2025
3 Feb
'25
7:28 p.m.
On 2/3/25 17:43, ben via cctalk wrote:
On 2025-02-03 5:06 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk
wrote:
I get the feeling that you haven't done much x86 programming. Look at
some real code where arguments are pushed on the stack before a call,
local storage is allocated (stack frame) by setting BP, and addressing
of any member of the stack can be accomplished with {BP+displacement]
addressing.
If DS and CS are different, you can address 128KB without issues (why
would one want to change the executable code? If you want a private
stack area, set SS to something different.
To push the point a bit further, one need not have explicit stack
hardware if a generous enough register file is provided and
register-displacement addressing is implemented. Witness, for example,
IBM 370.
--Chuck
On 2/3/25 15:47, ben via cctalk wrote:
Was the X86 family meant for pascal type languages?
Other than the small model, every thing is a hack. No compiler generates bad code,just some hardware
was never meant to
have stack based addressing, like the 6502 or the 8088/8086.
Really? The x86 family does indeed have stack-based addressing. In
particular, The BP register holds the base of the stack frame and the
assumed segment is SS. Even the lowly 8085 has some (undocumented) nod
toward stack addressing.