On 29 Oct 2009, at 10:52 am, Robert Ransom wrote: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 03:02, Alaric Snell-Pym <ala...@snell-pym.org.uk > > wrote: > Haskell implementors may have some relevant experience with this sort > of thing, in particular :-) I wonder what fun could be had > generalising lazy evaluation to potentially involve parallel threads? > I guess the same sorts of issues with continuations (and, therefore, > exceptions) arise there. > > No. Haskell does not allow continuation capture (except as a side- > effect within the continuation monad; look up Control.Monad.Cont for > details).
Oh, yes, I wasn't talking about the semantic issues with combining laziness (or concurrency) and general continuations (and all they imply, such as continuable exceptions) - although I suspect those needn't be a problem within the restricted scope of evaluating arguments where the application doesn't proceed until all the thunks have been thought - but that I think some work has been done on how to optimise laziness to avoid having to actually thunk everything, which I suspect would be applicable in this case too. ABS -- Alaric Snell-Pym Work: http://www.snell-systems.co.uk/ Play: http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/ Blog: http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/archives/author/alaric/ _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list r6rs-discuss@lists.r6rs.org http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
