Neil Cerutti horpner at yahoo.com
Wed Jun 13 08:15:18 EDT 2007

• Previous message (by thread): Python's "only one way to do it" philosophy isn't good?
• Next message (by thread): Python's "only one way to do it" philosophy isn't good?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

On 2007-06-13, Steve Howell <showell30 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> You would just change the language definition to say that once
> you enter f(), any call to f() from within f() behaves as if
> the recursively called f() still points to the originally bound
> version of f.  To want any other behavior would be absurd,
> anyhow. 

There's a reason it's generally refered to as "tail-call"
optimization and not "tail-recursive" optimization. The former is
more general, and, I believe, easier to implement than the
latter.

-- 
Neil Cerutti
The peace-making meeting scheduled for today has been cancelled due to a
conflict. --Church Bulletin Blooper

---

• Previous message (by thread): Python's "only one way to do it" philosophy isn't good?
• Next message (by thread): Python's "only one way to do it" philosophy isn't good?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Python-list mailing list