--- /dev/null	Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
+++ b/paste/paste.1949	Mon Oct 07 22:14:54 2013 +0000
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+2012-12-13.txt:06:38:35: <Fiora> but isn't the idea of tail call elimination that you just optimize a recurisve function into a loop via code transformation?  so like, the function doesn't exist anymore kinda
+2013-10-07.txt:19:15:13: <fungot> boily: every procedure returns a recurisve procedure. http://www.kendyck.com/ 2005/ 02/15-feb-2005 the scsh manual is?!
+2013-10-07.txt:19:17:56: <tswett> I'd love to see the origin of "every procedure returns a recurisve procedure".
+2013-10-07.txt:19:18:28: <tswett> Search for "recurisve procedure", man.
+2013-10-07.txt:19:18:30: <Bike> "every procedure returns" and "returns a recurisve procedure" massed up.
+2013-10-07.txt:19:19:18: <tswett> Yeah, but what sorts of things return recurisve procedures?
+2013-10-07.txt:19:19:45: <Bike> https://www.google.com/search?q=recurisve this misspelling is more common than i thought.
+2013-10-07.txt:19:19:53: <tswett> I guess you could say that the Y combinator returns a recurisve procedure. But we wouldn't call it a procedure.
+2013-10-07.txt:19:21:33: <tswett> Like, since it's a "procedure", that seems to imply that it's an actual piece of computer code. A recurisve one, to boot. But what sort of thing would specifically return a piece of recurisve code, rather than just any type of code? Not a compiler. Usually.
+2013-10-07.txt:19:23:24: <Bike> recurisve*
+2013-10-07.txt:22:14:32: <oerjan> `pastelogs recurisve