proper tail calls
igor at mir2.org
Mon Jan 21 05:23:34 PST 2008
On 21/01/2008, Erik Arvidsson <erik.arvidsson at gmail.com> wrote:
> My concern with E (or A for that matter) is that it requires
> additional syntax. I'd prefer if we could keep the syntax small.
The explicit syntax has one extra flow. Since the type checker is
optional, even with explicit syntax the program may still compile just
to throw an
exception 100% when it reaches the tail call due to the runtime type checks.
I would bye the arguments about the explicit syntax if its semantics
would guarantee the tail call as long as the code compiles without
relining on optional parts of E4X. But since this is not possible,
then I would prefer to make the tail calls an optional optimization in
the same way as the type checker is optional.
More information about the Es4-discuss