🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Bx6z1J.57r@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:

   [ you could use continuations ]

   There are two major problems with this.  For one, the stack grows with
   the non-returns, and taking care of this would be at least as bad as
   garbage collection, if not worse, as stack locations are, for extremely
   good reasons, not globally known.  For another, this does not handle
   procedures which continue the resource use of the current procedure.

If the whole thing is written using continuations, then the stack does
not have to grow at all as each function has no "return" it only has a
"goto next" call at the end.  As for using values in the current
"procedure", pass them as parameters, the compiler _should_ notice
that they are being used in a routine that is being "goto'd to" and so
not actually push them on the stack or otherwise shuffle them about.
If I had a (cooperative) Scheme compiler online I'd try this out to
see what sort of code it produces, but I don't, so I can't :-<

bevan