Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.redatomik.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.057 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.89; '*S*': 0.00; 'received:134': 0.05; 'expected.': 0.09; 'subject:module': 0.09; '11:19': 0.16; 'cyclic': 0.16; 'received:ac.be': 0.16; 'reedy': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; "wouldn't": 0.16; ';-)': 0.18; '>>>': 0.20; 'am,': 0.23; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'module': 0.25; 'header:User- Agent:1': 0.26; "doesn't": 0.26; 'helpful': 0.27; 'order.': 0.27; 'used,': 0.27; 'mathematical': 0.27; 'module.': 0.27; 'code': 0.30; 'certainly': 0.30; 'received:be': 0.30; 'probably': 0.31; 'generally': 0.32; 'run': 0.33; 'impression': 0.33; 'behind': 0.35; 'on,': 0.35; 'important.': 0.35; 'knowledge': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'faster': 0.36; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.36; 'pm,': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'agree': 0.37; 'seem': 0.37; 'version': 0.38; 'does': 0.39; 'subject:-': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'care': 0.60; 'skip:u 10': 0.61; 'back': 0.62; 'more': 0.63; 'believe': 0.66; 'colleagues.': 0.84; 'pardon': 0.84; 'respect.': 0.84; 'glad': 0.87; 'involved.': 0.91 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApkIABe2qFWGuA9G/2dsb2JhbABahCsBg0e9WYJUAoISAQEBAQEBhS8BAQQjVRELGAICBRYLAgIJAwIBAgFFEwgCiCq5QZFGhGYBAQgCIIEiiiqFDRaCUoFDAQSUTYdPhE6IO5BIJoN+gzgBAQE Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:06:01 +0200 From: Antoon Pardon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/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> <55A6280C.3090602@rece.vub.ac.be> <55A76116.7070708@rece.vub.ac.be> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 27 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1437120370 news.xs4all.nl 2891 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:34116 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:93996 On 07/16/2015 09:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 7/16/2015 3:45 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: >> On 07/15/2015 11:19 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: >>> >>> I believe that this pattern should work with any set of mutually >>> recursive functions that always call each other in cyclic order. A >>> more elaborate version does not have this limitation. >>> >> >> Nice of you to illustrate the warping involved. ;-) > > Glad you appreciate it. To me, the warping is no more than, and > perhaps less than, and certainly less obnoxious than,the warping > required when using Baruchel's tco module. (Opinions can vary, > of course.) The result will definitely run faster than with B's tco. I don't care about the speed that much. Clarity of code is more important. And I agree how Baruchel's tco module needs to be used, doesn't seem very helpful in that respect. I wouldn't call it obnoxious, cause I can appreciate the mathematical elegance behind it, but my impression is that understanding what is going on, requires a back ground knowledge that is generally not expected. So using this would probably be good for job security but wouldn't be fair to my colleagues. -- Antoon Pardon