RetroSearch Browse

Mon May 17 21:18:43 CEST 1999 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/1999-May/095218.html

The estimable Aaron Watters queries:
> The illustrious Sam Rushing avers:
> >Continuations are more powerful than coroutines, though I admit
> >they're a bit esoteric.  I programmed in Scheme for years without
> >seeing the need for them.  But when you need 'em, you *really* need
> >'em.  No way around it.
> 
> Frankly, I think I thought I understood this once but now I know I
> don't. How're continuations more powerful than coroutines? And why
> can't they be implemented using threads (and semaphores etc)?

I think Sam's (immediate <wink>) problem is that he can't afford 
threads - he may have hundreds to thousands of these suckers.

As a fuddy-duddy old imperative programmer, I'm inclined to think 
"state machine". But I'd guess that functional-ophiles probably see 
that as inelegant. (Safe guess - they see _anything_ that isn't 
functional as inelegant!).

crude-but-not-rude-ly y'rs

- Gordon

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/1999-May/095218.html below:

[Python-Dev] coroutines vs. continuations vs. threads