there are restrictions on what could be done at compiler level in terms of optimizations - scala, for example, can only optimize tail recursions to the same method and only for non-overridable methods a TCR optmization should work across multiple tail recursive method invocations without blowing the stack - currently, to do that, you have to trampoline
but i generally agree with joshua in that we need an even better desktop story (it is already shaping up quite nicely) On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Weiqi Gao<weiqi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The JVM is nothing but a big compiler (and a garbage collector + some > other stuff.). > > Joshua Marinacci wrote: >> I guess I always thought tail recursion was a compile time trick, not >> something to be done in the JVM. Is it that people want tail recursion >> added to the Java language? >> On Jun 16, 2009, at 8:03 PM, Michael Kimsal wrote: >> >>> My understanding is people want this in the JVM so that it's >>> standardized, and worked on by core people. I may be misinterpreting >>> the call for it, but I take it as similar to the 'invokeDynamic' stuff >>> that is coming up in Java. That same sort of behaviour is being >>> attempted in things like Groovy already. If it's a standardized part >>> of the core JVM, then everyone can stop working on their own >>> implementations and share in the continued development that those >>> features can enjoy because they are centralized. >>> >>> Anyone with more insight on why TCR should be in the core JVM itself >>> and not in external projects? >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Joshua Marinacci <jos...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:jos...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Is there a reason why this needs to be added to the JVM? Couldn't >>> functional languages on the JVM implement it in their own compiler >>> (Scala, Lisp, Scheme, etc.) >>> -j >>> >>> On Jun 16, 2009, at 5:53 PM, Paul King wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> If you want to apply a functional style to your programming, even >>>> relatively simple algorithms >>>> which intuitively shouldn't require many resources bomb out early >>>> without tail call optimizations. >>>> It isn't the end of the world but you have to choose less >>>> expressive/declarative solutions to >>>> your problems which as well as being less elegant are much harder >>>> to understand/maintain. >>>> >>>> Cheers, Paul. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Joshua Marinacci >>>> <jos...@gmail.com <mailto:jos...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Okay.. seriously dudes! I've been hearing this request over >>>> and over. Of all of the things missing from the Java platform >>>> (and they are many, believe me), why is *tail recursion* the >>>> make or break feature for the future of the Java platform? >>>> Seriously?! Tail Recursion?! Not fixing applets or >>>> modularity or starting up 18 times faster, but tail >>>> recursion!? WTH! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Michael Kimsal >>> http://jsmag.com <http://jsmag.com/> - for javascript developers >>> http://groovymag.com <http://groovymag.com/> - for groovy developers >>> 919.827.4724 >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > -- > Weiqi Gao > weiqi...@gmail.com > http://www.weiqigao.com/blog/ > > > > -- http://mapsdev.blogspot.com/ Marcelo Takeshi Fukushima --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
