4
\$\begingroup\$

While there are only 8 questions tagged with , it might make sense to separate protocol stack questions from activation record stack (or more generally stack as as software data structure) and from evaluation stack (which could use a tag text like 'stack-processor' even though it would apply to the Java VM and probably to x87).

So would it be appropriate to retag the protocol stack questions with a new tag and use for the software data structure (including activation record stack) perhaps with a note in the info text/tag wiki summary that questions about evaluation stacks (if any are ever asked) would be tagged ?

In hindsight, perhaps protocol stack questions might be moved to .

\$\endgroup\$
5
\$\begingroup\$

Frankly, it sounds like the tag should just be scrubbed. 8 questions and 3 different meanings? The tag is meaningless.

Heck, protocol is a generic tag itself.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Actually, there were not any questions for the third (execution stack) meaning. I suspect you are correct since in neither case would the tag communicate much interesting/useful information (it is not a subject anyone is likely to follow or use for a tag [rather than Q/A text] search). \$\endgroup\$ – Paul A. Clayton Jan 24 '14 at 14:24

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .