[m-dev.] mutual tail recursion warnings
novalazy at gmail.com
Wed Sep 13 15:06:30 AEST 2017
On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 00:17:45 +1000 (AEST), "Zoltan Somogyi" <zoltan.somogyi at runbox.com> wrote:
> Do people think that adding an explanation along the lines of
> "the fault for the non-tail nature of this recursive call may lie
> in another predicate" would be sufficient to reassure programmers
> when they can't find the fault in the predicate (in this case, odd)
> mentioned in the error message, or should we try to avoid generating
> the misleading error message at all?
Can we name the predicate(s) in the SCC which is the source of the problem?
> The latter would require
> changing the error message about the actual source of the problem
> (the non-tail call in even) to explain that it may affect its whole SCC,
> not just the predicate in which it appears.
I wouldn't necessarily think to look at the error message for another
predicate, at least, not initially.
More information about the developers