Re: Tail recursion in Java, was Proper Tail Recursive C++

"John D. Ramsdell" <ramsdell@linus.mitre.org>
2 Apr 1997 16:09:33 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Re: Proper Tail Recursive C++ erik.schnetter@student.uni-tuebingen.de (1997-03-21)
Re: Tail recursion in Java, was Proper Tail Recursive C++ danwang@atomic.CS.Princeton.EDU (1997-03-22)
Re: Tail recursion in Java, was Proper Tail Recursive C++ Dave@occl-cam.demon.co.uk (Dave Lloyd) (1997-03-27)
Re: Tail recursion in Java, was Proper Tail Recursive C++ ramsdell@linus.mitre.org (John D. Ramsdell) (1997-04-02)
Re: Tail recursion in Java, was Proper Tail Recursive C++ hbaker@netcom.com (1997-04-03)
Re: Tail recursion in Java, was Proper Tail Recursive C++ markt@harlequin.co.uk (1997-05-14)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "John D. Ramsdell" <ramsdell@linus.mitre.org>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 2 Apr 1997 16:09:33 -0500
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 97-03-129 97-03-136 97-03-155
Keywords: Java, optimize

> Surely the compiler has to apply the same policy statically as would
> be applied dynamically.


How does a Java VM know that the code it is running is produced by a
compiler?


I think part of the reason Java implementations are not required to be
tail recursive is to ease the tranlation of Java programs into raw C.
Scheme-to-C does not produce truly tail recursive implementations of
Scheme programs, I guess Sun did not want a semantic gap between Java
VM's and C translations.


John
--

Post a followup to this message

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