4 ms·
The title is wrong, should be `More recursive definitions`. The title simply engages my pedantic self and makes me want to point out that tail recursion == loo
by cryptonector 4y ago
The title is wrong, should be `More recursive definitions`.
The title simply engages my pedantic self and makes me want to point out that tail recursion == looping and, really, that recursion is looping.
- kadoban 4y agoI think of loops as a ~syntactic concept. You could implement loops with recursion, but I wouldn't call manual recursion a loop. Similarly I wouldn't call a manual "goto" a function call, even if one way you'd implement function calls could be with goto.
- chowells 4y agoNo, the title is correct. It specifically means "without generating <<loop>> output". That's a diagnostic GHC-generated code emits when it discovers that evaluating a thunk requires the result of evaluating that same thunk. The title does use a bit of shorthand, as it's aimed at Haskell developers. And any Haskell dev using GHC with enough experience has run into <<loop>> before. So the title isn't wrong; it's just for a different audience.