From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Michael Heerdegen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Delimited continuations Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 15:27:57 +0100 Message-ID: <87y3m8nhqq.fsf@web.de> References: <87r2s2cyoj.fsf@web.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1513088987 2134 195.159.176.226 (12 Dec 2017 14:29:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 14:29:47 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 12 15:29:39 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eOlYv-000089-VO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 15:29:38 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58714 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOlZ2-00061C-UJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 09:29:44 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48275) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOlXf-0003xv-2h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 09:28:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOlXa-0005WX-2D for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 09:28:19 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.web.de ([217.72.192.78]:61605) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOlXZ-0005VI-P8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 09:28:14 -0500 Original-Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.74.165.17]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb102 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MTh6a-1eXSge0ADI-00QSCp; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 15:28:12 +0100 In-Reply-To: (John Wiegley's message of "Sun, 10 Dec 2017 11:59:16 -0800") X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:O26mAVukRK2EMBFOkKsj6701bs3G/P6Rsk8BOELEEPY3LxceF0v t+uZYi8G3kAgebaTntawqwdz8/mI6kiJYgj8zwimTq0Ve6UIP/mRKbK+HU2yCBSgJ1PjJPq jvs7CeJm/h1G/6ahKA1wacSmjNrX/TGrNDrZ0e3yYP05Nhy/5VdTT90AaceOobFzUrfMbfF ErXagwxFeZ0eZEMxYIb1w== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:vzGKV1U4OJ8=:98pPeFvWp20h/w+OOuDu0C HzCQjvLiEu+NqaUzK/IBqGl/0w0rC8J9EUA6oJYrci6X3S65CjxR7e602nh6x3zGxGN5w3mpl UoIyBd5ha3v3iX03zr9W8yXXUmVs6EBnn9Y/LgIe6hy1wKESwHkR2bPIFbe2W4vyj1fgsYxv2 KCesxb9C6EVrz1z2I9BEOt0wTxyOgO3oD+niEsw/srlT6s/5f52V+5ZG9tPVQ7gnG6LqNXatY 1ZGVN0gS/iXRW5rjTtn1l3R2CUoJXl+2lsSkKZCxAGpEqm5JMUHejOh/txgTFTuLWixwauADH EYt0YvPRLbzHzOCOQcSb9WWig2NupmylL4/VgmrmITDoYYWoTIYWPSxPNsdEriykT9ApqPJDs SQNxzH3XpGmVHq3RaTIdtpsw4aWRB32lcI9Yb+KJNfE7RfuzhBSq+LV17cX+k0XbFgavNiBw2 2/c/EZftcjMUlHAvMKnA5HCTJ9wz+gIejnLNTpW2G7ErtdKM62JO0N5o5rmHKi7N3AAl+3xta hmKG2m8gOqNBTpgQJRcnI6v12unMGgqpERF4udEgzn6X+15qB/yAmQAv+es4MlguNU96XqVot NBwY1YlVTBKACakJ02i0Nkfk2MwmAnemShskLJV7thna30+aZlTbB3bf8+ek/qlXZzm/9klry S/5AWDggP9E5JnbUq8NgtoqGk1DjM9TD5sLeHH5ctoCNcKj3t1fP8AT1OEg0Ixd3GR/2g5Gpk 43+j+3u4JU2uCogzzMt4IbUgG6ft1Nc+NhsmNC31ZC1PGMkEwGrGOcyxYyPEZbYBim4aB/+j X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 217.72.192.78 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:220924 Archived-At: "John Wiegley" writes: > HM> (+ 1 2) is executed twice. I think this isn't necessarily so? > > Yes, except if you think about it, this "initial evaluation" whose > results are thrown away can be used to establish lexical bindings to > be captured by the lambda passed to shift; or to influence which shift > is used within a complicated reset block. This can be done in the "first run". I think it's the "second run" that is "too much" because it doesn't belong to the limited continuation of the context of `shift'. Michael.