News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Texas Instruments on Scheme (1984). Parent comment

Re:Texas Instruments on Scheme (1984) by Johnny_Brahms on Friday June 02, 2017 @02:21AM (#14467886)
Some schemes now have delimited continuations [1], and with Dybvig behind the wheel of Chez scheme I wouldn't be surprised if they show up there as well.

It is a superior construct in every way. The performance and memory usage, even for the simplest usage, is way better, and because they are delimited they are easier to reason about.

1: guile, scheme48, racket's scheme lang (using rackets native delimited continuations together with their r6rs Lang)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Texas Instruments on Scheme (1984) by MycroftJones on Friday June 02, 2017 @03:23AM (#14468114)
Thanks for the reference, I'll look into that. How does the performance and memory usage of deliminted continuations compare to implementing the control flow constructs directly?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Texas Instruments on Scheme (1984) by Johnny_Brahms on Saturday June 03, 2017 @02:14PM (#14477624)
Which are you comparing to? They are quite specialised, and are probably expensive as far as control operators go, but delimited continuations beat undelimited continuations every day of the week.

I remember benchmarking the coroutine generator from srfi-125 (??), and already for the simplest case the delimited continuations in guile (compared to the undelimited ones in the reference implementation) were about 3x faster.

[ Parent | on HN ]