From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,999172cfe4113340 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Aidan Skinner Subject: Re: How to implement a continue statement in Ada? Date: 2000/02/10 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 584230951 X-NNTP-Posting-Host: skinner.demon.co.uk:158.152.76.219 References: <87pgm3$o3p$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <87pmrq$9ae1@news.cis.okstate.edu> <87s8s3$aai1@news.cis.okstate.edu> X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 950211495 nnrp-06:24870 NO-IDENT skinner.demon.co.uk:158.152.76.219 Organization: Insert witty pun [here] Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net Date: 2000-02-10T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner) writes: > On 08 Feb 2000 22:28:08 +0000, Aidan Skinner wrote: > >I would expect this case to be picked up by the compiler, without the > >need for an explicit goto. Was there a reason why the appropriate > GNAT didn't recognize it as tail recursion, so the non-recursive > version performed better with certain (pathological) code. I'd Having just tried a simple example, it doesn't recognise this at all. I'm a bit surprised by this TBH... > tail recursion than GNAT, as it's not important for most Ada > programs. I don't know, I use it quite a lot in libra, mostly in the data structures (a lot of the code which walks through the strucutres uses tail recursion). It's probably over-used though, so I may change it... - Aidan -- http://www.skinner.demon.co.uk/aidan/ Before asking a tech a question, think: "Does this person care? Is this in anyway meaningful to their existence?". If the answer is "No", please read the documentation supplied, specifically Chapter 9: Suicide.