Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!ucbvax!bloom-beacon!dont-send-mail-to-path-lines
From: gyro@cymbal.reasoning.COM (Scott Layson Burson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Subject: Tail-calling and garbage collection
Message-ID: <9102112032.AA03542@cymbal.reasoning.com.>
Date: 11 Feb 91 20:32:43 GMT
Sender: daemon@athena.mit.edu (Mr Background)
Reply-To: Gyro@reasoning.com
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 14

This is a follow-up to my previous message about a beneficial property
of tail-recursion elimination vis-a-vis garbage collection.

Jim McDonald of Lucid has pointed out to me that my message might be
taken to imply that the benefit I was describing is somehow unique to
Scheme, and couldn't be had in an implementation of Common Lisp even if
that implementation supported full tail-recursion elimination, as do,
for instance, Lucid CL and Coral CL.  I didn't mean to say that; I meant
to be claiming this benefit for tail-recursion elimination independent
of language.  It's just that the CL I use the most is a more traditional
implementation, and so I sloppily thought of that as a property of the
language, which it isn't.

-- Scott