Tail/Non tail recursion

Thomas Lindgren <>
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)
> implementations
> 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.

Best,
Thomas


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list