[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Guile and MS-Windows on Major Govt. Project...

From: Ken Anderson
Subject: Re: Guile and MS-Windows on Major Govt. Project...
Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 18:11:46 -0400

At 10:30 PM 7/5/2002, Chris Bitmead wrote:

Yeah, ok well they should be considered. But jscheme is an interpreter within an interpreter == unnecessarily slow. None of them technically are Scheme (no call/cc, blurry picture on full tail calls etc).

I'm curious what you actually want to have full call/cc for - except as a "check-off (completeness) item.

As far as I know, I don't. Does anyone know prior to starting a project if it is needed? Also, what if I pull in an external library that uses it? Ok, I'm not quite experienced enough in Scheme to know how likely that is.

I'm a beginner too, having only done Scheme for the past 4.5 years. To make it worse, my scheme never had call/cc, so i never learned how to take advantage of it. My current belief is that if your Scheme has full call/cc, you just use it. If it doesn't, you make do without it, because that's what you do in any language that's missing the feature you want.

Dick Gabriel made a comment about Scheme once, that suggested to me that without call/cc Scheme is relatively easy to implement in languages like C and Java. Requiring call/cc is an extra step in language implementation. Probably a step as least as large as requiring GC. Perhaps we are currently more willing to live without call/cc than we are about living without GC.

We need to provide good examples of using call/cc, so that future implementations will be more willing to provide it.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]