On 06/07/12 10:25, Emmanuel Medernach wrote:

> I don't think it is a good idea to mix laziness, which is about delaying
> computation, with futures which are explicitly about parallelism.
> Eventually evaluating a promise in parallel invalidates the whole
> laziness idea: it prevents one to implement infinite streams with finite
> memory for instance.

Indeed, it needs to be triggered by a "hint" to the implementation that
this is desirable, as the OP suggested. Whether that hint is to "call it
a future" or something else is another matter :-)

>
> Cheers,
> --
> Emmanuel

ABS

--
Alaric Snell-Pym
http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/

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