Tail/Non tail recursion
Wed Sep 3 17:42:50 CEST 2003
--- "Richard A. O'Keefe" <> wrote:
> It seems a little unreasonable to call an operation
> a "destructive"
> update just because *some* (and definitely not all)
> might have put something there first.
"Unreasonable" seems a bit strong a word, I'd say.
Surely you can see why one can reasonably choose to
*do* call the update a destructive one?
If not, I am willing to explain this further; but
frankly, I'd prefer to let it rest.
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
More information about the erlang-questions