Lars T Hansen
lth at opera.com
Mon Jun 26 07:22:04 PDT 2006
Nicolas Cannasse writes:
> > It's not obvious that this has huge implications for the standard
> > libraries in ECMAScript as they stand, but this type of problem will
> > tend to make libraries more brittle in general.
> > The point I want to make is that we probably do not want to provide
> > full continuations as an abstraction on which to build threads,
> > coroutines, generators, exceptions, and so on, but instead to provide
> > these other more controllable forms directly instead.
> I agree that call/cc is not for the average user, and should be used
> with the appropriate care. However, while it's important to provide the
> different call/cc traditional usages (which you listed), it's also
> important to provide the low-level call/cc access for users that want to
> use it.
> There's been a lot of creativity in the past years about the way of
> using continuations. I think we can except new paradigms in the future
> as well. As a compiler writer, I prefer to be able to directly use
> call/cc in the generated code and libraries instead of rewrapping and
> sometimes abusing the standard ES4 library.
I don't think that being a compiler target is among the core use cases
for ECMAScript 4. (Nor do I think it should be.) I also don't think
that a pragmatic programming language like ECMAScript should follow
Scheme, say, in providing a minimalist and powerful core on which a
great variation of abstractions can be written by the initiated.
Instead I think ECMAScript needs to be a rich language with features
that are immediately useful to its core audiences, and which play well
with each other in the sense that they have unsurprising consequences
More information about the Es4-discuss