From: Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 22:52:03 -0800
Bob Rogers wrote:
> You want a patch that just gets rid of Error_Handler? This might be
> messier without the other changes . . .
Not urgent. It may turn out that the experiment is really only useful
Bob Rogers wrote:
Out of the possible hacks we could do, I'd rather go for the hack of
providing a way to create a new RetContinuation from within the C code
(even if it's a special kind of return continuation with the same
interface, but a different set of internal actions to sat
From: Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 22:50:57 -0700
Bob Rogers wrote:
>Almost two weeks ago, I had what I thought was a clever idea for
> eliminating the continuation barrier from action invocation: Simply
> call the action using the original cont
Bob Rogers wrote:
Almost two weeks ago, I had what I thought was a clever idea for
eliminating the continuation barrier from action invocation: Simply
call the action using the original continuation instead of creating a
new RetContinuation. The original continuation, I reasoned, should be
r
Almost two weeks ago, I had what I thought was a clever idea for
eliminating the continuation barrier from action invocation: Simply
call the action using the original continuation instead of creating a
new RetContinuation. The original continuation, I reasoned, should be
re-entrant after havi
