Hi,
I was just wondering about the tail call confusion around here.
Why not just mark a tail call in bytecode ?.
This is not strictly a new idea , and is "inspired" by:
"""
In addition, each of these instructions may be immediately preceded by a tail.
instruction prefix. This specifies that the calling method terminates with
this method call (and returns whatever value is returned by the called method).
The tail. prefix instructs the JIT compiler to discard the caller's method
state prior to making the call
"""
from the ECMA 335 spec for IL.
Wouldn't something like that be possible here instead of figuring out the
tail call stuff at runtime ?. (more work for the compiler devs :-)
Or am I totally off course here ?.
Gopal
--
The difference between insanity and genius is measured by success
