On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 2:21 AM, David Herman dher...@mozilla.com wrote:
Hm. Maybe you meant to return the function to allow access to the local
variable
k through a closure? And not a fingerprint
mixed shift(function)
as I read it at first?
I don't know what you're saying, but I have
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 4:57 PM, David Herman dher...@mozilla.com wrote:
Example:
function f() {
try {
for (let i = 0; i K; i++) {
farble(i);
// suspend and return the activation
let received = shift (function(k) { return
What happens if you don't supply a function but another type, or none?
The simplest thing is to specify it as a runtime error if the argument to shift
is not callable. You're right that there's an overhead to constructing a new
function. But it gives you flexibility that's otherwise a pain for
I don't understand this question-- do you mean whatever value the
handler function (in the example, function(k) { return k })
returns? Then no, there's no augmentation or mutation here. The
continuation is represented as an object with three methods:
Ah, I didn't know that.
It'd be cleaner
Hm. Maybe you meant to return the function to allow access to the local
variable
k through a closure? And not a fingerprint
mixed shift(function)
as I read it at first?
I don't know what you're saying, but I have already posted the semantics in
this thread. I *think* it should be pretty
One of the semantics I suggested and then dismissed for single-frame
continuations was based directly on the operators shift and reset from the
PL research literature.[1] To my eye, when we dressed them up to look like a
function call (with -), they suggested that we were calling a function in
Also notice that, unlike JS 1.7 yield, a function that uses shift is not
special in that it doesn't immediately suspend its body when you first call
it. But because it's a syntactic operator, it's more manageable for
implementors of high-performance ES engines, since they can trivially
7 matches
Mail list logo
