Path: csiph.com!optima2.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed7.news.xs4all.nl!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path: <ethan@stoneleaf.us>
X-Original-To: python-list@python.org
Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status: OK 0.023
X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.95; '*S*': 0.00; 'from:addr:ethan': 0.09; 'from:addr:stoneleaf.us': 0.09; 'from:name:ethan furman': 0.09; 'message-id:@stoneleaf.us': 0.09; 'subject:module': 0.09; 'vast': 0.09; 'folks': 0.15; 'examples?': 0.16; 'iteration.': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'all,': 0.20; 'am,': 0.23; 'examples': 0.24; 'written': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'header:User- Agent:1': 0.26; 'equally': 0.29; 'routine': 0.29; '~ethan~': 0.29; 'asked': 0.29; "can't": 0.32; 'point': 0.33; 'useful': 0.33; "d'aprano": 0.33; 'steven': 0.33; 'handle': 0.34; 'best,': 0.35; 'there': 0.36; 'serve': 0.36; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'received:10': 0.37; 'mean': 0.38; 'or,': 0.38; 'test': 0.39; 'expressed': 0.39; 'subject:-': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'easy': 0.60; 'real': 0.62; 'charset:windows-1252': 0.62; 'received:10.1.10': 0.84; 'toy': 0.84; 'responses': 0.93
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 10:54:35 -0700
From: Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: A new module for performing tail-call elimination
References: <55a3dcd9$0$3024$426a34cc@news.free.fr> <mailman.532.1436952589.3674.python-list@python.org> <55a76628$0$2846$c3e8da3$76491128@news.astraweb.com>
In-Reply-To: <55a76628$0$2846$c3e8da3$76491128@news.astraweb.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post: <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help: <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.598.1437069280.3674.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 22
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace: 1437069280 news.xs4all.nl 2838 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:35639
X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:93943

On 07/16/2015 01:07 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:

> The point is, people keep insisting that there are a vast number of
> algorithms which are best expressed using recursion and which require TCO to
> be practical, and yet when asked for examples they either can't give any
> examples at all, or they give examples that are not well-suited to
> recursion. Or, at best, examples which are equally good when written either
> using recursion or iteration.

You mean toy examples?

Toy examples serve useful purposes:

   - easy to understand
   - easy to write
   - esay to test as proof-of-concept (after all, if a routine can't handle
        a toy example, how is it going to handle real life?)

With responses like these I can understand Antoon's position that folks are not arguing in good faith.

--
~Ethan~