What are some good ways of implementing tail call elimination?

I've written a small Scheme interpreter in an unholy mix of C/C++, but I have yet to implement proper tail calls.

I am aware of the classic Cheney on the MTA algorithm, but are there other nice ways of implementing this? I know I could put the Scheme stack on the heap, but that would still not be proper elimination, as the standard says one should support an unlimited number of active tail calls.

I've also fiddled with longjmps, but so far I think it'll only work well for non-mutual recursive tail calls.

How do the major C-based Schemes implement proper tail recursion?

Simpler than writing a compiler and VM is to registerize and trampoline your interpreter. Since you have an interpreter and not a compiler (I assume), you only need a couple straightforward transformations to get proper support for tail calls.

You'll have to first write everything in continuation-passing style, which may be weird to think about and do in C/C++. Dan Friedman's ParentheC tutorial steps you through transforming a high-level, recursive program into a form that is machine-translatable to C.

In the end, you'll essentially implement a simple VM where instead of using regular function calls to do eval, applyProc, etc., you pass arguments by setting global variables and then do a goto to the next function's label (or use a top-level loop and a program counter). eval()'s eventual tail call

    return applyProc(rator, rand)

becomes

    reg_rator = rator
    reg_rand = rand
    reg_pc = APPLY_PROC
    return

That is, all of your functions that normally call each other recursively are reduced to a pseudo-assembly in which they are just blocks of code that don't recur and instead just set up the data of what to call next. A top-level loop controls the program:

for(;;) {
  switch(reg_pc) {
    case EVAL:
      eval();
      break;
    case APPLY_PROC:
      applyProc();
      break;
    ...
  }
}

I went through the same process for my hobby Scheme interpreter, written in JavaScript. I took advantage of a lot of anonymous procedures, but it might help as a concrete reference. Look at FoxScheme's commit history starting from 2011-03-13 (30707a0432563ce1632a) up through 2011-03-15 (5dd3b521dac582507086).

Non-tail recursion will still consume memory, even if it's not in the stack.