Re: Tail calls via trampolining and an explicit instruction

On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:45 PM, James Iry <jamesiry@...> wrote:
> Yeah, but yours is nicer.  The only contribution mine might make over yours
> is an implicit so that non-tail calls can be expressed directly.
>
> implicit def done[X](x: => X) = Done(x)
>
Ah, yes, that's neat! I don't think there would be confusion since the
method return type is already a TailRec.

> Also, my base case used call-by-name in its construction.  I did that to
> ensure side effects always occur in the expected order, but the more I think
> about it the more I think that strict evaluation achieves that too.
>
I'd think so, yes.

Cheers

 -- Martin