Hacker GitHub

← All repos

tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax

View on GitHub ↗ ★ 170 HTML

Discussion and specification for an explicit syntactic opt-in for Tail Calls.

17 mentions on Hacker News by 15 people: 1 story, 16 comments · first 2016-04-23 · latest 2023-12-31

Mentions per year 17 mentions · busiest year 2016 (5)
20082026
AllStoriesComments NewestTopOldest
  1. …Mozilla declared it impossible to implement across realm boundaries due to their security model). https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax has a lot of useful information about it all, and a proposal to make it explicit in syntax, such…
    comment by chrismorgan · 2023-12-31 · in Bun, JavaScript, and TCO
  2. …in ES6] 2. Implemented and shipped it behind a flag 3. Unshipped it. 4. Proposed something else [ https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax ] Prior to that, Firefox had proposed a carve out for cross-realm calls, but then they didn’t…
    comment by systoll · 2022-07-13 · in Tell HN: We are trying to get tail calls into the WebAssembly standard
  3. …PTC: - performance - developer tools - Error.stack - cross-realm tail calls - developer intent See: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax#issues-with-ptc Apple's 2016 response as to why they won't implement STC is here:…
    comment by richdougherty · 2022-06-15 · in What happened to proper tail calls in JavaScript? (2021)
  4. …!() => expr // We could do like we did for # above, but it also reads strangely: () !=> expr https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax#syntax-alternati...
    comment by richdougherty · 2022-06-15 · in What happened to proper tail calls in JavaScript? (2021)
  5. from the linked PTC proposal in the article ( https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax ): > Unfortunately, the TC39 process at this time did not require heavy implementation involvement and so while many implementers were skeptical, the…
    comment by Kwantuum · 2022-06-15 · in What happened to proper tail calls in JavaScript? (2021)
  6. …automatic support. Automatic optimisation is currently in the spec but is apparently controversial. https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax
    comment by richdougherty · 2018-03-18 · in Tail calls, tailrec and trampolines (2009)
  7. …use it. EDIT: I'd also add that the performance impact in the real world seems to be close to zero. https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax/issues/7
    comment by hajile · 2018-02-02 · in V8 JavaScript Engine Release v6.5
  8. …spot.com/2016/04/es6-es7-and-beyond.ht... The TC39 topic they site hasn't been touched in two years : https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax
    comment by ballenf · 2017-10-25 · in V8 Release 6.3
  9. …within strict mode, and the compiler stages definitely know that for free already.) [0]: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax#performance
    comment by lvh · 2017-09-09 · in Safari is the new IE
  10. Probably looking for this then: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax/issues/22 But their pushback is for pragmatic reasons, not because they don't like recursion/tail calls.
    comment by coldtea · 2017-08-10 · in Node 8.3.0 released
  11. …it’s own 'standard library’ and an enormous package ecosystem to use. I think it will be fine. [0] https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax [1] https://github.com/tc39/proposals
    comment by thomasfoster96 · 2017-01-30 · in ECMAScript 2017: the final feature set
  12. …as well. I'm interested in getting everyone's point of view. We've been discussing pros and cons at https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax/issues and https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/issues/535 , and it'd be great to have your input,…
    comment by LittleDan · 2016-04-29 · in ES6, ES7, and beyond
  13. …of pushback instead. It seems very likely that syntax will get changed to `return continue fn()` https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax Somewhat related there is no optimization for passing arbitrary length arrays with `...` to…
    comment by chr1 · 2016-04-26 · in Node.js v6.0 Released
  14. …existing code. Plus a whole bunch of unaddressed debugging issues (what does console.stack show?). https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax
    comment by epmatsw · 2016-04-25 · in Node.js ES2015/ES6 support
  15. …hidden behind a flag. We are preferring the explicit approach championed by Mozilla and Microsoft ( https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax ) because it makes the debugging and error analysis story better.
    comment by natorion · 2016-04-25 · in V8 Release 5.1
  16. …it at this point. Also, the fate for tail-call-elimination is pretty uncertain at the moment; see: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax
    comment by ofrobots · 2016-04-23 · in V8 Release 5.1