Jon Harrop wrote: > On Thursday 02 April 2009 15:36:38 kirk wrote: > >> Jon Harrop wrote: >> >>> On Thursday 02 April 2009 15:09:12 Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: >>> >>>> It's not necessarily Sun's choice when it exhibits external behavioral >>>> changes. Such changes must be standardized so all JVMs will support >>>> them. If it were just up to Sun, it would probably go in (since I know I >>>> want it and several others want it). >>>> >>> Ok. I only care about Sun's JVM because it is the defacto standard. If >>> tail calls are not adopted as a standard across all JVMs, what are the >>> odds of Sun including them just in its own JVM as an extension? >>> >> why do they have to be exposed? Isn't tail recursion and implementation >> detail? And an optimization at that? >> > > Elimination of tail calls is a requirement for certain kinds of program to > run > correctly. If tail calls are not eliminated, such programs leak stack space > until they die from a stack overflow exception. > which would favor VMs that support tail-recursion as an optimization. Again, I'd just implement it in Sun and watch others follow. If it is this big a problem, they will follow. Trying to force a standard will take a long time and require a lot more effort IMHO.
Regards, Kirk --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to jvm-languages@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to jvm-languages+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
