Error stack strawman
rossberg at google.com
Fri Feb 19 09:29:34 UTC 2016
On 19 February 2016 at 06:29, John Lenz <concavelenz at gmail.com> wrote:
> However, at the CPU level, it seems like you would be better pushing an
> return address for a special function that indicated the start of a
> sequence of tail calls. That way you trade only some
> complexity/performance for tail calls (an inspection of the last entry of
> the call stack) and some stack frame building complexity (to recognize this
> "special" frame).
There is no way of knowing, neither statically nor dynamically, that you
are at "the start of a sequence of tail calls". And doing it for every tail
call would of course defeat tail calls.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss