Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
At any rate, it demonstrates how the idiom has its place in Python.
Perhaps it does, but I think I'd still prefer it to be explicit. The call in Marko's example is not actually a tail call as written. To make it a tail call, a return would need to be added: > return child.setvalue(keyseq, value, offset + 1) To someone reading the code, it's not obvious why the return is there. It looks redundant, and is likely to get removed by someone who thinks it's a mistake. Using a dedicated keyword would make it clear that tail call behaviour is being relied upon, and avoid looking like a spurious return. -- Greg -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
