Warp <war### [at] tag povray org> wrote:
> sounds like you could argue in favor of languages like brainfuck which
> have a minimal set of instructions, yet are still Turing-complete.
Scheme:
Minimalist. check
Power. check
Flexibility. check
Brainfuck:
Minimalist. check
> Eg. just because tail recursion is enough to perform any kind of
> looping construct doesn't necessarily mean that special looping constructs
> wouldn't be a useful tool.
That's why you got for-each in the standard and a few more. (which, obviously,
are macros wrapping tail-recursive calls)
Post a reply to this message
|