I have become quite interested in tail-call optimisation and more distantly
in code that assembles trees of closures all tied to the same scope through
parameters to reduce stack management for complex but not always
predictable input.
As I have learned from some reading, tail call optimisation
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 9:34 AM Louki Sumirniy <
louki.sumirniy.stal...@gmail.com> wrote:
A tail call is in the first approximation just what it says:
call foo
ret
Nothing other is really that much special about it.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
But yes, similar to how all recursive functions can be rewritten using loops,
which are more efficient, that is essentially what tail call optimization does
- just that the process it automatic.
> On Apr 6, 2019, at 5:21 AM, Jan Mercl <0xj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 9:34 A
Quoting Robert Engels (2019-04-06 08:00:02)
>But yes, similar to how all recursive functions can be rewritten using
>loops, which are more efficient, that is essentially what tail call
>optimization does - just that the process it automatic.
Not all recursive functions -- just tail ca
The opportunity to optimize yb tail-call elimination comes up in my coding
from time to time. It is generally trivial to do but sometimes less so, and
this example by Ian Denhardt is one I'd never considered and one that would
make doing the rewrite yourself impossible.
Generally though it is ver
You are correct, but I think an explicit stack is faster than most function
calls, but it depends on number of parameters needed, etc. but maybe not...:)
> On Apr 6, 2019, at 12:20 PM, Ian Denhardt wrote:
>
> Quoting Robert Engels (2019-04-06 08:00:02)
>
>> But yes, similar to how all recur
