He says, "I think the semantics of computer programs should be made explicit in their syntax" However, when the semantic definition specifies tail calls, when t

He says, "I think the semantics of computer programs should be made explicit in their syntax" However, when the semantic definition specifies tail calls, when tail calls are performed is trivially lexically obvious. Either he doesn't understand the paper he cited or he was not being careful with his wording. I don't think anyone will be able to have a constructive conversation with him about this until he both gets the paper or can precisely word his objections. I think that may be why people keep pointing him at the paper. As an alternative to reading the paper, he could also just implement a basic ML compiler that does CPS and performs tail calls. It'd probably take him less time than it took to write that post and read all the comments he's going to get...