From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: Re: shift and reset in ice-9 control Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 16:56:14 +0200 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1301496986 1895 80.91.229.12 (30 Mar 2011 14:56:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 14:56:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-guile@gnu.org To: Wolfgang J Moeller Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 30 16:56:22 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q4woj-0003jL-BO for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 16:56:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52409 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q4woi-00063J-L4 for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:56:16 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46605 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q4woY-000605-7k for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:56:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q4woR-0005UG-PZ for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:56:06 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:56680 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q4woR-0005U2-Ju for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:55:59 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D025540F3; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:57:46 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=tp9UtXKgcA4PqtspOQujb5AoR3o=; b=svoraC yJU5+/z9E7pnCb+DfbYVi5p+YtmTANAnH9Z6fV3NtVrxnQJG/dsF+Qs2DaguFktr sfPhfNn4diEPK8cscvPp/PM/MQEBmPlmJAplmdNjbzvvszr2UDSQSiL8MYB533FQ bAPWR9BMhcyR249p2MLFp8cH/lpLl2+eGBRhs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=SmXvz2z1n3h4dENw6tOHJ8nHhDfSzlV8 iU68lBCWKMRu9j+phUqOjVcvxhyGJ6TAWGgkRkix8xqs+VPMTP20LUBZYQ/HGTOW T7BvyKBhOgcsXq3rIjgztw/R6BDd8sPOhfcFx9yElXASNGYvJvtJtvxq40PsUR5X JAT34+3eO0c= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD6D140F2; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:57:44 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [90.164.198.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2932F40F0; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:57:42 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Wolfgang J. Moeller's message of "Mon, 21 Mar 2011 02:31:01 +0100 (CET)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 11AD4518-5ADE-11E0-9EB6-E8AB60295C12-02397024!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 64.74.157.62 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:5386 Archived-At: On Mon 21 Mar 2011 02:31, Wolfgang J Moeller writes: > Hello again, > > On Thu, 17 Mar 2011, Andy Wingo wrote: >>[...] >> On Wed 09 Mar 2011 11:53, Wolfgang J Moeller writes: >>[...] >> > (define-syntax reset >> > (define-syntax shift >> Did you write these yourself? May we include them in (ice-9 control)? > > Yes and yes. Sweet, thanks. > However, I don't like it anymore, since I seem to have learned > that this "direct implementation" doesn't at all play well > with the use of call/cc within the s, while the call/cc-based > implementations of shift/reset appear to do so. > > I've yet to find out why the latter work "better", and if there's > a remedy possible using something like with-continuation-barrier ... Can you give some examples? In Guile things should work fine, AIUI. In the future (i.e., 2.2), I would like to change continuations to capture just the Scheme stack, and optionally delimit their extent to a prompt. I recommend Flatt et al's ICFP 2007 paper for a discussion. Regards, Andy -- http://wingolog.org/