Re: Stack overflow in relatively simple programs
- From: grue@xxxxxxx (Timofei Shatrov)
- Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 07:20:34 GMT
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 05:08:54 +0100, Pascal Bourguignon <pjb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
tried to confuse everyone with this message:
Dan Bensen <randomgeek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
fairchild.anthony@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
I believe this is more a problem with your algorithms and not Lisp.
Nothing but tail calls there. What's wrong with them?
Common Lisp doesn't specify anything relative to tail calls.
Implementations don't necessarily implement tail call optimization.
clisp doesn't on interpreted code, to ease debugging.
But, it needs to be said, if you compile this code, the programs work just fine.
(compile 'new-primes)
and so on...
--
|Don't believe this - you're not worthless ,gr---------.ru
|It's us against millions and we can't take them all... | ue il |
|But we can take them on! | @ma |
| (A Wilhelm Scream - The Rip) |______________|
.
- References:
- Stack overflow in relatively simple programs
- From: robinganemccalla@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Stack overflow in relatively simple programs
- From: fairchild . anthony
- Re: Stack overflow in relatively simple programs
- From: Dan Bensen
- Re: Stack overflow in relatively simple programs
- From: Pascal Bourguignon
- Stack overflow in relatively simple programs
- Prev by Date: Re: Stack overflow in relatively simple programs
- Next by Date: Re: Stack overflow in relatively simple programs
- Previous by thread: Re: Stack overflow in relatively simple programs
- Next by thread: Re: Stack overflow in relatively simple programs
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|