On 18/07/2015 23:39, Gregory Ewing wrote:
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.
A time to use perhaps the most abused part of any programming language,
a comment?
Using a dedicated keyword would make it clear that tail
call behaviour is being relied upon, and avoid looking
like a spurious return.
+1
--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.
Mark Lawrence
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
