Re: [Scheme-reports] Technical question Aaron W. Hsu (26 May 2011 22:01 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Technical question Alex Shinn (26 May 2011 22:25 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Technical question Eli Barzilay (29 May 2011 08:50 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Technical question Jay Reynolds Freeman (26 May 2011 23:07 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Technical question Anton van Straaten (27 May 2011 03:04 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Technical question Jay Reynolds Freeman (27 May 2011 04:36 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Technical question Anton van Straaten (27 May 2011 08:43 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Technical question Ray Dillinger (27 May 2011 16:35 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Technical question John Cowan (27 May 2011 18:02 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Technical question Andy Wingo (27 May 2011 06:58 UTC)

Re: [Scheme-reports] Technical question Andy Wingo 27 May 2011 06:57 UTC

On Fri 27 May 2011 01:06, Jay Reynolds Freeman <jay_reynolds_freeman@mac.com> writes:

> One could argue that the continuation k which is to receive the
> three values 1, 2, and 3, is within the body of the unnamed lambda
> expression
>
>     (lambda ()
>       (call-with-current-continuation (lambda (k) (k 1 2 3)))
>       ;;
>       ;; <-- continuation k is right here, so to speak
>       ;;
>       )

You'd be wrong :)  This call/cc is in tail position.  The captured
continuation is that of the invocation of the outer `lambda'
expression.

Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports