[REBOL] Re: About CONTINUATIONS
From: chaz:innocent at: 22-Feb-2002 1:03
From: <[Robbo1Mark--aol--com]>
>What point are you making in relation to REBOL?
I apologize for being so obscure, please let me try again.
There may indeed be something of value with regards to REBOL and
continuations, but speaking as an observer, only, I've seen little evidence
of interest in continuations, in this community.
http://www.ai.mit.edu/~gregs/ll1-discuss-archive-html/msg00679.html
This posting is apparently by Joe Marshall the man who put continuations in
REBOL 1.0 in the first place.
If anyone should be an strong advocate for having continuation is REBOL he
would be that person, but in fact poster merely states that continuations
provide some advantages in coding the language, but in general they are
unnecessary, and that he himself doesn't care whether or not a language
contains them.
...The fact of the matter is that first-class continuations *aren't* used
very often in `standard' code, and that CATCH/THROW, structured error
handling, and a thread package will cover virtually all practical of
first-class continuations.
For this reason I don't much care if a language has first-class
continuations or not. Sure, it is a bonus, and I *always* put them in
to languages that I implement (REBOL 1.0 has first-class
continuations), and they make writing the error handler and debugger
far, far easier, but the end user doesn't care..."
