|
|
|
|
|
|
by murisitarusenga
3298 days ago
|
|
|
I will try to read into the details of Scheme's implementation of continuations... The reason I made the claim about efficiency is because Scheme's continuations have an unlimited lifetime. This is in contrast to L2's continuations that can only have a dynamic lifetime. (The rules for manipulating continuations in L2 are analogous (and only analogous) to the rules for returning the addresses of local variables in C.) So I just assumed that Scheme implementations must occur an overhead for the greater generality of their continuations. |
|
|
An implementation of call/cc can be efficient provided you are willing to sacrifice the notion of a single execution stack and embrace constructs like spaghetti stacks that allow for indefinite lifetime of an execution context.