[Python-Dev] Proper tail recursion

Tim Peters tim.peters at gmail.com
Fri Jul 16 02:30:33 CEST 2004

[Andrew Koenig]
> Especially because if we allocate such objects in the same way as we
> allocate other objects, we no longer need to have an upper bound on the
> number of such objects that can exist at one time.
> For that matter, perhaps we could make such objects explicitly accessible by
> user programs.  If we did that, of course, we would not want to restrict
> such objects to the ones that correspond to tail calls--we might as well
> create them for all calls.  We might even make it possible to "call" such an
> object, the effect of which would be to cause execution to continue from the
> state it was in when that object was created.  Gee, once we do that, we
> don't need to keep that information around on the stack any more at all.
> I guess we need a catchy name for such objects.  Because we can use them to
> make execution continue from an arbitrary point, how about calling such an
> object a "continuation?"  <very big wink>

Every sufficiently advanced implementation of Python will indeed
reinvent Stackless, but continuations are a "don't go there" topic
even for long-suffering Christian now <wink>.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list