[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Coroutines

On 2001-11-30T21:45:48-0500, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>    That's not connected to having catch/call-cc in your language.
>    It's also true that you do NOT need continuations to model
>    catch/call-cc. You can do it with a very different semantics with
>    pleasing properties. Sorry.

This sounds interesting -- could you please go into more detail or
give some references?

> 2. Church didn't come close to continuations, though as Griffin discovered
>    working with me, some logicians did. They embedded a part of classical
>    logic into constructive logic and *that* turned out to be like cps-ing. 

I am vaguely aware of this, but a canonical reference would be greatly

Edit this signature at http://www.digitas.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/ken/sig
Ken "these contents are unpredictable" Shan

Attachment: pgp19001.pgp
Description: PGP signature