On Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 10:08 PM Hsuan-Chi Kuo <hsuanchikuo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > No, I didn't hit this limit. > > The current implementation already keeps tracks of the number of tail > calls which to me is the same effort of tracking the stack size. I was > just wondering if there's any fundamental reason that you can't reset > the stack directly. But it seems that there is not. The tail_call unwinds the current stack frame. See comment at line 3585 for details. And please don't top post.
