Re: Tail-Call Elimination Use-Cases

"David Mosberger-Tang" <David.Mosberger@acm.org>
31 Jul 2002 00:32:01 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Tail-Call Elimination Use-Cases baueran@in.tum.de (Andreas Bauer) (2002-07-21)
Re: Tail-Call Elimination Use-Cases cr88192@hotmail.com (cr88192) (2002-07-24)
Re: Tail-Call Elimination Use-Cases neelk@alum.mit.edu (Neelakantan Krishnaswami) (2002-07-24)
Re: Tail-Call Elimination Use-Cases wilson@redhat.com (Jim Wilson) (2002-07-24)
Re: Tail-Call Elimination Use-Cases felixundduni@freenet.de (felix) (2002-07-24)
Re: Tail-Call Elimination Use-Cases baueran@in.tum.de (Andreas Bauer) (2002-07-25)
Re: Tail-Call Elimination Use-Cases baueran@in.tum.de (Andreas Bauer) (2002-07-25)
Re: Tail-Call Elimination Use-Cases David.Mosberger@acm.org (David Mosberger-Tang) (2002-07-31)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "David Mosberger-Tang" <David.Mosberger@acm.org>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 31 Jul 2002 00:32:01 -0400
Organization: Home
References: 02-07-066 02-07-100 02-07-123
Keywords: optimize, GCC
Posted-Date: 31 Jul 2002 00:32:01 EDT

>>>>> On 25 Jul 2002 23:30:19 -0400, "Andreas Bauer" <baueran@in.tum.de> said:


    >> gcc 3 has new tail call and sibling call optimizations, and they
    >> are working fairly well. Further improvements are possible, but
    >> that is a matter of finding volunteers interested in working on
    >> this part of GCC.


    Andreas> It is *very* limited and therefore gets hardly used. A few
    Andreas> limitations are:


    Andreas> - signature of caller and callee must match; there is no
    Andreas> tail-call, but tail-recursion implemented


I don't think so. gcc3.1 definitely can handle last-calls. It gets
triggered surprisingly often (on ia64, anyhow) and it's sometimes
surprising when your "backtrace" is skipping callers.


--david


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.