home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: nntp.teleport.com!plogan
- From: plogan@teleport.com (Patrick Logan)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk
- Subject: Re: Will Java kill C++?
- Followup-To: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk
- Date: 19 Apr 1996 13:58:58 GMT
- Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016
- Message-ID: <4l8672$a03@nadine.teleport.com>
- References: <3134D499.653E@ix.netcom.com> <4kbfn8$1bu@news1.is.net> <4kqjf6$kh0@kaiwan009.kaiwan.com> <317173F1.5790@concentric.net> <Dpz6It.2An@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> <31759951.6E0@polymorphicSoftware.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: julie.teleport.com
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
-
- Hal Hildebrand (halh@polymorphicSoftware.com) wrote:
-
- : Nice try. Smalltalk can't eliminate tail recursion for all the
- : reasons that it is claimed to be slow. No type information...
-
- Huh? Type information has nothing to do with tail recursion
- elimination. Otherwise Scheme would be blowing stacks all over
- the planet.
-
- Consider...
-
- SomeObject>>someMessage: anObject
- | anotherObject |
- anotherObject := anObject someOtherMessage.
- ^anotherObject yetAnotherMessage
-
- The second message send in this method is tail recursive since
- the sender of #someMessage can directly receive the answer from
- sending anotherObject the #yetAnotherMessage.
-
- --
- Patrick Logan plogan@teleport.com
-