|[8 earlier articles]|
|Re: Proper Tail Recursive C++ Wilco.Dijkstra@armltd.co.uk (Wilco Dijkstra) (1997-03-01)|
|Re: Proper Tail Recursive C++ email@example.com (1997-03-05)|
|Re: Proper Tail Recursive C++ firstname.lastname@example.org (1997-03-09)|
|Re: Proper Tail Recursive C++ email@example.com (1997-03-13)|
|Re: Proper Tail Recursive C++ firstname.lastname@example.org.OZ.AU (1997-03-13)|
|Re: Proper Tail Recursive C++ email@example.com (1997-03-16)|
|Re: Proper Tail Recursive C++ danwang@atomic.CS.Princeton.EDU (1997-03-18)|
|Re: Proper Tail Recursive C++ firstname.lastname@example.org (1997-03-21)|
|Re: Proper Tail Recursive C++ email@example.com (1997-03-21)|
|From:||danwang@atomic.CS.Princeton.EDU (Daniel Wang)|
|Date:||18 Mar 1997 12:44:55 -0500|
|Organization:||Princeton University Department of Computer Science|
|References:||97-02-111 97-02-131 97-02-141 97-03-042 97-03-048 97-03-075|
> firstname.lastname@example.org (Henry Baker) writes: ....
>> Not at all. Tail recursion is an essential optimization has been
>> difficult for non-Lisp languages to implement because they are still
>> stuck with the original Algol-60 stack model.
John D Ramsdell <email@example.com> writes:
> Funny thing is that Java is not stuck with a stack model, yet
> implementations of Java are not required to be tail recursive. When
> will people ever learn? ... :-(
The security manager which is part of the security API has a function
that lets the SM figure out the call chain. Some of the current
security mechanisms would conceivably break in the presence of tail
call optimizations. I think this is the main reason Java is "stuck"
with the stack model for now at least.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.