[giantdude]

Thanks, that is what I thought, but didn't trust my memory.

Yes, I did mean optimization - without it you can blow through your stack quickly (and the traceback will be long and redundant :)

[xapata]

In those cases, you may wish to use a dynamic programming technique. A bit of caching might be a greater optimization than tail call elimination. The `@functools.lru_cache` tool is very easy to experiment with.

[xapata]

> will be long and redundant

They made a highly redundant traceback display much more pleasant a couple years ago, writing "the same thing 1,998 more times ..." or something like that.

[aidenn0]

Common lisp doesn't require tail call elimination either, fwiw

[bjoli]

But every implementation except clisp, ECL and clisp do it reliably.

[aidenn0]

sbcl doesn't always do it, depending on optimization settings, and clisp does do it when compiling; by "reliably" perhaps you meant "by default"?

[tmtvl]

I think you may have meant to substitute ABCL for one of those clisps?