On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:56:39 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Barb Knox wrote:
>
>> Instead of function A returning to its caller, the
>> caller provides an additional argument (the "continuation") which is a
>> function B to be called by A wit
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Barb Knox wrote:
> Instead of function A returning to its caller, the
> caller provides an additional argument (the "continuation") which is a
> function B to be called by A with A's result(s).
That's just a callback. I've been doing that in C code (and other
simil
Matthias Benkard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> continuations. There used to be a project called Stackless Python that
> tried to add continuations to Python, but as far as I know, it has always
> been separate from the official Python interpreter. I don't know whether
> it's still alive. You may
David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There is a Scheme implementation (I keep forgetting the name) which
> actually does both: it actually uses the call stack but never returns,
> and the garbage collection includes the stack.
That would be Chicken Scheme.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chic
David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+---
| George Neuner writes:
| > Upward continuations can be stack implemented. On many CPU's, using
| > the hardware stack (where possible) is faster than using heap
| > allocated structures. For performance, some Scheme compilers go to
| >
George Neuner writes:
> Yes and no. General continuations, as you describe, are not the
> only form continuations take. Nor are they the most common form
> used. The most common continuations are function calls and returns.
> Upward one-shot continuations (exceptions or non-local returns) are
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:49:58 +0200, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
>> was all along unheard of. Its not even in paul graham's book where i
>> learnt part of Lisp. Its in Marc Feeley's vid
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
> was all along unheard of. Its not even in paul graham's book where i
> learnt part of Lisp. Its in Marc Feeley's video.
>
> Can anyone explain:
>
> (1) its origin
> (2) its syntax and semantics in em
> If nothing else, please use Google. Many will thank you.
>
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Definitional+Interpreters+for+Higher-Order+Functions&btnG=Search
http://www.brics.dk/~hosc/vol11/contents.html
Definitional Interpreters for Higher-Order Programming Languages
Definitional Interpre
Corrected the links...
1. Programming Languages: Application and Interpretation
Shriram Krishnamurthi
Part VII Continuations
http://www.cs.brown.edu/~sk/Publications/Books/ProgLangs/2007-04-26/plai-2007-04-26.pdf
2. Essentials of Programming Languages (2nd edition)
Friedman, Wand and Haynes
Chapt
> Can anyone explain:
>
> (1) its origin
>From the Bibliographic Notes of Chapter 12 Continuations in a Functional
Language, Theories of Programming Languages by John C. Reynolds, page 370:
"A history of the repeated discoveries of continuations (occurring largely
in the context of functional lan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Matthias, thanks for the reference, but I dont have access to an
> engineering library. I would appreciate, if you have access to paper/
> scanner or electronic copy to help many of us out, you are
> not just helping me but many will thank you.
Given that you seem to b
On Oct 9, 2007, at 3:32 PM, . wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 19:20:06 +, gnuist006 wrote:
>
>> On Oct 8, 11:09 pm, "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 05:15:49 +, gnuist006 wrote:
>>
>>>
Can anyone explain:
>>>
(1) its origin
>>>
>>> One of the lambda papers, I t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.lang.functional:
> > One of the most lucid explanations of definitional interpreters --
> > including those that are based on continuation-passing -- are
> > explained in J. Reynolds' famous 1971 "Definitional Interpreters for
> > Highe
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 19:20:06 +, gnuist006 wrote:
> On Oct 8, 11:09 pm, "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 05:15:49 +, gnuist006 wrote:
>
>>
>> > Can anyone explain:
>>
>> > (1) its origin
>>
>> One of the lambda papers, I think. I don't remember which.
>
> Hey no-name
On Oct 9, 5:50 am, Matthias Blume <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 05:15:49 +, gnuist006 wrote:
>
> >> Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
> >> was all along unheard of. Its not even in paul graham's book where
> (6) any good readable references that explain it lucidly ?
This was something that has been very interesting to me for a while
now, and I'm actually still having a difficult time wrapping my head
around it completely.
The best written explanation that I've come across was in "The Scheme
Progra
Special thanks to many of you for your very decent replies.
On Oct 9, 11:18 am, George Neuner wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 05:15:49 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
> >was all along unheard of. Its not even in paul graham's bo
On Oct 8, 11:09 pm, "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 05:15:49 +, gnuist006 wrote:
>
> > Can anyone explain:
>
> > (1) its origin
>
> One of the lambda papers, I think. I don't remember which.
Hey no-name "dot" you are the only one who says its origin is in
one of the old
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 05:15:49 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
>was all along unheard of. Its not even in paul graham's book where i
>learnt part of Lisp. Its in Marc Feeley's video.
>
>Can anyone explain:
>
>(1) its origin
Lambd
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
| was all along unheard of. Its not even in paul graham's book where i
| learnt part of Lisp. Its in Marc Feeley's video.
|
| Can anyone explain:
|
| (1) its origin
|
On Oct 9, 2:09 am, "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 05:15:49 +, gnuist006 wrote:
> > (3) Is it present in python and java ?
>
> Certainly not Java, I dunno about Python. I've never seen someone use
> them in Python, but the pythonistas seem to want to add everything but a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Oct 8, 10:59 pm, Barb Knox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Lambda calculus. Instead of function A returning to its caller, the
>> caller provides an additional argument (the "continuation") which is a
>> function B to be called by A with A's result(s). In pure "
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 05:15:49 +, gnuist006 wrote:
>
>> Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
>> was all along unheard of. Its not even in paul graham's book where i
>> learnt part of Lisp. Its in Marc Feeley's video.
>>
>> Can an
> (3) Is it present in python ...?
I don't keep up to date with the recent developments in Python land,
but the last time I used Python, it certainly didn't have first-class
continuations. There used to be a project called Stackless Python
that tried to add continuations to Python, but as far as
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On Oct 9, 7:34 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> which lambda paper ?
>
> Are you Ilias? I think you probably are.
He certainly isn't, but you are right that he smells like he's been living
under a bridge for quite a time...
Diez
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listin
On Oct 9, 7:34 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> which lambda paper ?
Are you Ilias? I think you probably are.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Oct 8, 11:07 pm, Bakul Shah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
>> You might like this one:
>>
>> http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2005/04/13/Continuations-for-Curmudg...
>
> thanks for the link but can you plz upload the paper so we can also
> get it.
You will ha
On Oct 8, 11:09 pm, "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 05:15:49 +, gnuist006 wrote:
> > Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
> > was all along unheard of. Its not even in paul graham's book where i
> > learnt part of Lisp. Its in Marc Feeley's v
On Oct 8, 11:07 pm, Bakul Shah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
> > was all along unheard of.
>
> The concept is 37 years old. Wadsworth in his "Continuation
> Revisited" paper says he & Strachey were
On Oct 8, 10:59 pm, Barb Knox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Lambda calculus. Instead of function A returning to its caller, the
> caller provides an additional argument (the "continuation") which is a
> function B to be called by A with A's result(s). In pure "continuation
> style" coding, noth
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 05:15:49 +, gnuist006 wrote:
> Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
> was all along unheard of. Its not even in paul graham's book where i
> learnt part of Lisp. Its in Marc Feeley's video.
>
> Can anyone explain:
>
> (1) its origin
One of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
> was all along unheard of.
The concept is 37 years old. Wadsworth in his "Continuation
Revisited" paper says he & Strachey were struggling with
extending the technique of denotational semantics to d
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
> was all along unheard of.
Don't be depressed about that. There are countless concepts out there
they you haven't yet heard of.
> Its not even in paul graham's book
Again I am depressed to encounter a fundamentally new concept that I
was all along unheard of. Its not even in paul graham's book where i
learnt part of Lisp. Its in Marc Feeley's video.
Can anyone explain:
(1) its origin
(2) its syntax and semantics in emacs lisp, common lisp, scheme
(3) Is it p
35 matches
Mail list logo
