[REBOL] Re: Tail recursion in REBOL 2.0

1999-11-28 Thread giesse
Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED]! On 28-Nov-99, you wrote: [...] o fac1 and fac2 are semantically identical. But how would you o dynamically see that you should eliminate tail recursion in o fac2? Sure, you could do it by looking forward some bytes o (seeing that there isn't anything more to do in

[REBOL] Re: Tail recursion in REBOL 2.0

1999-11-27 Thread ole_f
Hello John On 27-Nov-99, you wrote: If I've comprehended that correctly, a good language should eliminate tail recursion and replace it by iteration. This is a feature of most CommonLISP systems and Scheme. Well, that would probably require some static analysis of the REBOL program,