[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Search] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [FWP] Re: Neat or horrid?

To: fwp@technofile.org
Subject: Re: [FWP] Re: Neat or horrid?
From: John Porter <jdporter@min.net>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 14:38:21 -0400
In-Reply-To: <14641.19332.557534.726456@prometheus.frii.com>; from gnat@frii.com on Sun, May 28, 2000 at 10:38:28AM -0600
References: <20000526224822.16157.qmail@arenanetworks.com> <yzqk8gfkvzm.fsf@compugen.co.il> <14641.19332.557534.726456@prometheus.frii.com>

Nathan Torkington wrote:
> >      goto &sum 
> 
> goto is not how you do recursion.  

goto& is how you do tail recursion elimination, in perl.

However, to my great dismay, doing the TRE is significantly
slower than recursing without tail elim... and it has gotten
worse in 5.6.

-- 
John Porter

Just another perky hacker.

==== Want to unsubscribe from Fun With Perl?  Well, if you insist...
==== Send email to <fwp-request@technofile.org> with message _body_
====   unsubscribe

References:
- [FWP] Re: Neat or horrid?
  - From: Ariel Scolnicov <ariels@compugen.co.il>
- Re: [FWP] Re: Neat or horrid?
  - From: Nathan Torkington <gnat@frii.com>

Prev by Date: Re: [FWP] Oy! Bad Perl
Prev by thread: Re: [FWP] Re: Neat or horrid?
Next by thread: Re: [FWP] Re: Neat or horrid?
Navigation: Date Index | Thread Index | Search | Other lists at bumppo.net