[racket] Tail recursive module cons

From: Patrick Useldinger (uselpa.list at gmail.com)
Date: Sat Mar 29 11:04:17 EDT 2014

On 29/03/2014 03:54, Yuhao Dong wrote:
> Using accumulator+reverse won't really improve the runtime at all.

Every other benchmark has (unfortunately) shown the opposite.

> I think that tail recursion doesn't help at all, and introduces
> conceptual overhead. Racket doesn't use the stack, and converts to
> continuation-passing, which is surprise-surprise *tail recursive* at
> runtime anyway.

I totally agree with you regarding the conceptual overhead, which is why 
I'm very surprised that TRMC, or doubly-linked lists, have AFAIK never 
made it to any Lisp implementation.


Posted on the users mailing list.