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 [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
