🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991Jan21.120628.2749@waikato.ac.nz> ldo@waikato.ac.nz
(Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Waikato University) writes:

>Is there anybody else left in the world who thinks closures are
>a pretty neat idea, and a damned (pardon my French) useful programming
>technique?

I would think that the entire Scheme community may be more than just
anybody, for example. ;-)

>... Some LISP hackers seem to think they've got
>closures too, but they haven't--all they've got is an almost-as-useful
>kludge that requires call frames to be allocated on the heap.

I do not know what you mean by almost-as-useful, as you are not specific
as to what is missing from, say scheme closures. The call frames are
not required to be on the heap at all times, they can be moved there when
necessary. (see [1] for example)

oz
---
[1]  William  D.  Clinger,  Anne  H.  Hartheimer  and  Eric  M.  Ost,
     Implementation  Strategies  for Continuations, Conference Record
     of the 1988 ACM Conference on Lisp and  Functional  Programming,
     August 1988, 124 131.
---
We only know ... what we know, and    | Internet: oz@nexus.yorku.ca 
that is very little. -- Dan Rather    | UUCP: utzoo/utai!yunexus!oz