DIP: Tail call optimization

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Monday, 11 July 2016 at 15:27:54 UTC, Dietrich Daroch wrote:
> I've been thinking about changing @tco for @boundedStack, as 
> it'll really reflect guarantees on functions while implicitly 
> asking for TCO on functions that require it. But the fact that 
> most functions should be marked as @boundedStack is something 
> that bothers me.

Just keep in mind that a @tco constraint is much easier to 
implement than @boundedStack. I don't do tail calls much, but I 
think you have the right idea for a system level language: 
specify the constraints you want to hold rather than explicitly 
laying out everything manually. That's what I expect from a 
modern system level language.

I have previously argued in favour of something similar like 
@boundedStack, but there is quite a bit of resistance against  
(and lack of interest in) solid static analysis in the D 
community.

You probably will save yourself some trouble by reading one of 
the numerous threads touching on stack handling in D. Here is one:

http://forum.dlang.org/post/logpgo$2k1d$1@digitalmars.com