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

[Peter Seibel <address@hidden>]

Guy Steele - Sun Microsystems Labs <Guy.Steele@sun.com> writes:

> P.S. Yes, per Pascal Costanza, Common Lisp with proper tail
> recursion and call/cc WOULD be a better language.

Mr. Steele (Guy? Quux?):

I'm curious if you happen to have an opinion on Kent Pitman's
argument[1] that call/cc would make Common Lisp a *worse* language
because it can't be compatibly combined with unwind-protect. I don't
have a particular point of view in this argument, mostly because I'm
not sure I've really understood what he's trying to say nor the folks
who have occasionally argued with him about it on comp.lang.lisp.

-Peter

[1] <http://www.nhplace.com/kent/PFAQ/unwind-protect-vs-continuations.html>

-- 
Peter Seibel                                      peter@javamonkey.com

         Lisp is the red pill. -- John Fraser, comp.lang.lisp