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

Re: why tail recursion matters and why Java isn't it, was Re: lispperformance was Re: problems with lisp

To: Guy Steele - Sun Microsystems Labs <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: why tail recursion matters and why Java isn't it, was Re: lispperformance was Re: problems with lisp
From: Pascal Costanza <address@hidden>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:21:47 +0200
Cc: address@hidden
In-reply-to: <200309042015.h84KF0P04473@sydney.East.Sun.COM>
Organization: University of Bonn
References: <200309042015.h84KF0P04473@sydney.East.Sun.COM>
Reply-to: address@hidden
Sender: address@hidden
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312

Guy Steele - Sun Microsystems Labs wrote:

> * History quiz: ten brownie points to whoever first correctly
> explains why I chose the number 700 here.

Because of http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/365230.365257 ? ;)


Pascal


-- 
Pascal Costanza               University of Bonn
mailto:costanza@web.de        Institute of Computer Science III
http://www.pascalcostanza.de  Römerstr. 164, D-53117 Bonn (Germany)

References:
- Re: why tail recursion matters and why Java isn't it, was Re: lisp performance was Re: problems with lisp
  - From: Guy Steele - Sun Microsystems Labs <Guy.Steele@sun.com>

Prev by Date: Re: why tail recursion matters and why Java isn't it, was Re: lisp performance was Re: problems with lisp
Next by Date: Re: OO should break when broken
Previous by thread: Re: why tail recursion matters and why Java isn't it, was Re: lisp performance was Re: problems with lisp
Next by thread: Re: why tail recursion matters and why Java isn't it, was Re: lispperformance was Re: problems with lisp
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread