[erlang-questions] Modeling Recursion into Tail Recursion
Tue Mar 24 15:37:33 CET 2015
Thank you so much for your valuable answers.
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 1:28 AM, <ok@REDACTED> wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 07:57:22AM -0700, Harit Himanshu wrote:
> >> *Question*
> >> 2. Can we turn every recursive function into tail-recursive? If no,
> >> how
> >> to identify?
> > As for the second question I'm not 100% sure I'm remembering this
> > correctly but using continuation-passing-style you could express every
> > recursive function with tail-recursion.
> Yes you can but it's not USEFUL to do so.
> Put very briefly, CPS style means passing an extra argument
> to each function, called a "continuation". This is a function
> that expresses "what to do next".
> Basically, it *is* the recursion stack you would otherwise have
> had, disguised as a function.
> There are plenty of good reasons to do this, such as situations
> where a function needs more than one continuation, or you want to
> simulate long-distance return, or you want a function that can
> return more than once, e.g., to do backtracking.
> But using CPS in order to use tail recursion is like cutting
> slots in nails so you can use a screwdriver on them.
> erlang-questions mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions