Re: default stack size

[Lynn Winebarger]

Joshua Judson Rosen wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 06, 2003 at 05:33:21AM -0500, Lynn Winebarger wrote:
> >   Yeah, but why not get it in the right order:
> >
> > (define (rep n)
> >  (let loop ((n n)
> >             (k (lambda (v) v)))
> >    (if (= n 0)
> >        (k '())
> >        (loop (- n 1)
> >          (lambda (v)
> >            (k (cons n v))))))
> >
> >   Though reliance on the stack may be/is probably more efficient.  All this
> > version does is allocate the stack in the heap, one disconnected frame at a 
> > time.
>
>
> ... and you can also use an `if', as Lynn has demonstrated above.
>
> Lynn, that's certainly an interesting point, but what's wrong with
> just changing the direction in which the counter progresses? :)

   Well what fun would that be? ;)
   Plus I didn't catch that he was coming from (another) lisp, so I
took it as an opportunity to enlighten a newbie.

Lynn