A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-July/046371.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: Proper tail recursion

[Python-Dev] Re: Proper tail recursion [Python-Dev] Re: Proper tail recursionTerry Reedy tjreedy at udel.edu
Tue Jul 20 03:58:12 CEST 2004
"Chris King" <colanderman at gmail.com> wrote in message
news:875c7e0704071517101e10f27a at mail.gmail.com...
> I'd then place this mechanism in the same category as such other
> implementation-altering functions as gc.disable(),

I believe gc.disable merely disables an execution path rather than
providing an alternative.

> sys.setrecursionlimt(1e9).

Changing a constant is rather trivial compared to what you are proposing.

>psyco.full(), and

This does seem analogous; it provides a large chunk of alternative
execution.  And it is not part of the core distribution (yet, that I know
of) but is instead a third party package/module, just a stackless is.  This
is probably what you should start with.

If a tail recursion group shows itself capable of handling patches, bugs,
docs, and tests for such an addon, and develops a large constituency, then
you might propose integration.  Or you might well decide you prefer to stay
independent and keep total control of your work.

Terry J. Reedy



More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4