On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 01:05:49PM -0500, Michael L Maraist wrote: > I know it's dangerous to compare hardware to a VM, but the required > equivalent would be to not tear down ANY scoping, and additionally, the > definition of a subroutine would have to preallocate ALL scopes before-hand.
I think you're making more of it than is necessary. The scheme requirement is that one can make an unbounded number of tail recursive calls in finite storage. This can be done using the equivalent of Perl's magical goto. This might destroy and re-create the same scope (though it's not clear how much real work that entails) on each call, but the storage required will be fixed. -- Jason
