On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 01:55:15PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote: > Given that a continuation is going to store the state of the > interpreter doesn't a serialized continuation have the potential to > get very large indeed? Which may well be a bad thing. As has been mentioned on a nearby subthread, we're probably just going to store the function call stack, not top-level variables or code. Continuations can still get large, especially if you create them deep within a chain of function calls with lots of my and local vars, and complex expressions requiring temporaries. Think of it as a somewhat elongated Carp::confess string. -John
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchronous I/O Uri Guttman
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchronous I/O John Tobey
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchronous I/O Uri Guttman
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchronous I/O Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchronous I/O Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchronous I/O John Tobey
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchronous ... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchro... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchro... John Tobey
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asyn... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asyn... John Tobey
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asyn... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchronous I/O Buddha Buck
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchronous ... John Tobey
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchronous ... Ken Fox
- Re: RFC 47 (v1) Universal Asynchronous ... Bart Lateur