Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!odi!dlw
From: dlw@odi.com (Dan Weinreb)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: Continuations
Message-ID: <1989Nov29.230331.19595@odi.com>
Date: 29 Nov 89 23:03:31 GMT
References: <2664@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu> <9624@pyr.gatech.EDU> <1623@odin.SGI.COM> <99894@ti-csl.csc.ti.com>
Reply-To: dlw@odi.com
Followup-To: comp.object
Organization: Object Design, Inc.
Lines: 12
In-Reply-To: gateley@m2.csc.ti.com's message of 28 Nov 89 21:33:24 GMT

In article <99894@ti-csl.csc.ti.com> gateley@m2.csc.ti.com (John Gateley) writes:

   I don't see why it would not be feasible, C++ has for loops and other
   control structures, why not continuations as well?

It depends what you mean.  It would certainly be possible to invent a
definition of a language that was like C, but also had the features
needed to do continuation-style programming.  Then you'd have a
definition of a new programming language.  However, if you're talking
about getting the ANSI X3J11 committee to incorporate such features
into their next draft standard, I think you'd have a lot of trouble,
since the changes would be large and would entail various tradeoffs.


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com