On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Alan wrote:
> Clever, but do we really want to encourage writing code that blows
> infinite stack, by burying the problem until all of the JVM's memory
> has been used up for stack? I agree there's a place for this sort of
> thing, but I don't think we would want to
On Mar 9, 2:27 pm, Ken Wesson wrote:
> It seems to me there is a way to make the JVM's stack effectively
> deeper -- even limited only by available memory.
>
> Threads have separate stacks, and there's no limit on threads,
> *especially* if they're nearly all sleeping. So ...
>
> (defn apply-with-
It seems to me there is a way to make the JVM's stack effectively
deeper -- even limited only by available memory.
Threads have separate stacks, and there's no limit on threads,
*especially* if they're nearly all sleeping. So ...
(defn apply-with-stack-extension [f & args]
(let [x (future
