Scheme language standardization process
On 11/10/2012 07:55 PM, Arthur A. Gleckler wrote: > Still, it would be a disservice to provide it in an implementation that > didn't support tail recursion, for example, since that's a basic feature > of the language and many programs won't work without it. Kawa does some non-trivial compile-time analysis that eliminates many tail calls - including of course plain tail-recursion, and some state-machine-style mutual tail-recursion. So most Scheme programs won't have a problem. However, some styles/idioms will have problems. > It would be > better to agree on a feature identifier that such languages can support. > This can be outside the spec, for example in an SRFI. One question to consider: What is the purpose of a feature identifier? Specifically, when would it be useful to cond-expand on r7rs? It might be useful to cond-expand on full-tailcalls, since one might use different algorithms depending on the answer. -- --Per Bothner per@x http://per.bothner.com/ _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list Scheme-reports@x http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports