From: no.email@nospam.invalid   
      
   dxf  writes:   
   > Moore and Fox discussed that.  Making a non-optimal approach more   
   > efficient isn't the answer.   
      
   Moore and Fox made cpu's that saved a lot of hardware by not having   
   registers.  If you're on a register machine though, why not use it?   
   Doing the opposite is far from optimal.   
      
   Locals may not have been practical on Moore's stack machines, but   
   neither was ROT, it seems to me.  So no locals and not that much   
   stackrobatics.  He instead used VARIABLEs all over the place, which   
   burnt extra storage since they often weren't all alive at the same time,   
   plus gave rise to naming troubles and loss of reentrancy, both sort of   
   odd for a stack language.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)