[racket] a little macro exercise

From: Neil Van Dyke (neil at neilvandyke.org)
Date: Sat Oct 9 23:33:54 EDT 2010

David Herman wrote at 10/09/2010 11:22 PM:
> I think maybe we're not disagreeing about anything at all. I wasn't arguing that splitting up the `case' is better -- I actually prefer the version that has one single `case'. My point was just that some of the earlier versions which did a repeated "am I supposed to be falling through?" conditional seemed like they'd generate worse code, and that it should at least in theory be possible to generate unconditional jumps with the straight-line tail-calling code.

That's been my thinking as well.  I wasn't clear when I said "multiple 
tests" before.


Posted on the users mailing list.