Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com>: > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> wrote: >> How about "return"? > > I think you miss my point entirely. "return" doesn't mean tail-call > optimize;
Why not? > it just means to return the result. Same difference. > This is what led to the confusion responsible for the bug that Chris > pointed out in the first place. With a keyword that explicitly means > "perform tail-call optimization *and* return", That could well be the explicit definition of the "return" statement in Python without changing the behavior of any working Python program today. > the association of the keyword with the optimization is much clearer, > and the programmer is much less likely to mistakenly omit it. The programmer shouldn't be controlling tail call optimizations. Marko -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
