From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christopher Cramer Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: Guile and MS-Windows on Major Govt. Project... Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 16:53:43 -0500 Sender: guile-user-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <20020708165343.B6725@kiwi.pyrotechnics.com> References: <3D1B1DCD.7090500@bitmead.com> <200206302346.11902.unknown_lamer@unknownlamer.org> <3D20E140.6050003@bitmead.com> <200207012113.58958.unknown_lamer@unknownlamer.org> <5.0.2.1.2.20020702112242.00b16ad0@zima.bbn.com> <3D22F264.9010502@bitmead.com> <3D25FFB4.9060500@bothner.com> <3D265661.9030201@bitmead.com> <5.0.2.1.2.20020706175041.0246dec0@localhost> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1026165320 19454 127.0.0.1 (8 Jul 2002 21:55:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 21:55:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17RgTY-00053f-00 for ; Mon, 08 Jul 2002 23:55:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17RgRN-00086X-00; Mon, 08 Jul 2002 17:53:05 -0400 Original-Received: from pyro.net ([207.7.10.6] helo=kiwi.pyro.net) by fencepost.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17RgQx-00084p-00 for ; Mon, 08 Jul 2002 17:52:39 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 10375 invoked by uid 8610); 8 Jul 2002 21:53:43 -0000 Original-To: Ken Anderson Mail-Followup-To: Ken Anderson , guile-user@gnu.org Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20020706175041.0246dec0@localhost>; from kanderson@bbn.com on Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 06:11:46PM -0400 Errors-To: guile-user-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:718 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.user:718 On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 06:11:46PM -0400, Ken Anderson wrote: > 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. I've been using Guile for years now, but I've never used call/cc except when I really tried to see if I could use it. I'm convinced that it's not nearly as useful as most people seem to think. Sometimes I wonder if the simple fact that call/cc is so difficult to implement efficiently justifies its removal from Scheme. call/cc to me is sort of like operator overloading in C++. It's neat, but have you ever tried to understand code that used it extensively? -- Christopher Cramer On résiste à l'invasion des armées; on ne résiste pas à l'invasion des idées. -- Victor Hugo _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user