[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Tail call elimination

From: Paul Smith
Subject: Re: Tail call elimination
Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 09:24:52 -0400

On Mon, 2020-05-18 at 21:40 -0400, Daniel Herring wrote:
> This decision causes a difficult and error-prone ambiguity when the
> return value is really true and empty.  For example, the operation
> succeeded and the result was "", versus the operation failed and thus
> returned "".  So Scheme added separate #t and #f values, C++ added
> true and false keywords, newer languages are adding an
> "optional/maybe" construct, etc.
> The present Make behavior is perfect for things like dependency
> lists. However, it feels limiting for other use cases.

I would prefer to talk about concrete issues so we can consider them. 
I personally haven't run into situations where the fact that "" equates
to false is a problem but obviously others may have very different

I'm really reluctant to start adding new higher-level language features
to GNU make unless there is a clear and obvious need that can't be
reasonably addressed any other way.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]