From: no.email@nospam.invalid   
      
   albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl writes:   
   > In hindsight my locals definition is not convincing, because carnal   
   > knowledge about the behaviour of the return stack is required.   
      
   It's ok if it's for a specific implementation.  But what I'm having   
   trouble seeing is how the locals get popped in case of an exception.  Do   
   you not need to implement something like (LOCAL) ?   
      
   > (I get 30 registers in RISCV that can serve as a stack pointer.)   
      
   In some models of the RISCV, only 14, I think.  And in almost all   
   models, 8 of them are more efficient to address than the rest, because   
   of the compressed instruction format.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)