Path: csiph.com!news.nrbbs.org!border-3.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 18:56:59 +0000 From: steve g Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Subject: Re: Resources to learn common lisp? References: <110a9pp$ckmk$6@dont-email.me> <115i4sf$uekh$1@dont-email.me> <874igxov3y.fsf@nightsong.com> <115n0v3$2h2oe$1@dont-email.me> <87zeyoo77t.fsf@nightsong.com> <116h0dv$2m9e2$1@dont-email.me> <116hd1l$2qooi$1@dont-email.me> <116hgb5$2s4uh$1@dont-email.me> <87tsojm54k.fsf@nightsong.com> <116jmt4$3jrlq$1@dont-email.me> <87fr01mplp.fsf@nightsong.com> <87tsogiuxx.fsf@safunu.org> <877blcmk4z.fsf@nightsong.com> <116pidp$3n6fk$1@paganini.bofh.team> <8733vzmixj.fsf@nightsong.com> Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 14:56:59 -0400 Message-ID: <87pkydja84.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cancel-Lock: sha1:QYA6rLSSdk+wOkyxGyGEIG3fuIQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Lines: 24 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-1nj4R0UWZT0Oh4btxbxWk5yESUuOEgzj4wvn8pBJ2+l7nYn3Sfbt3I9U3ZKWgLJp1IoQ3yXQ8OrfhHR!ri96UaD6ocE2aXrnolpiXXGxbmW+4IjhtLGyNc+YGkDciZ4= X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.lisp:61646 Paul Rubin writes: > antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) writes: >> And normally functions do not return, simply tail-call to passed >> "continuation". > > Continuations are nontrivial precisely because of the non-tail-call > case, where the continuation is re-used. So you can use them to > implement coroutines, multitasking, etc. If they can't do that, they're > not "full" continuations. I don't see how to implement full > continuations using CL macros. > > There is some sentiment[1] in the Scheme world that mandating full > continuations in Scheme was a mistake and that it would have been > preferable to stop with "delimited" or "one-shot" continuations. Those > are maybe closer to catch/throw than to coroutines. I don't know if > those can be done with CL macros but it seems more plausible. > > [1] https://okmij.org/ftp/continuations/against-callcc.html I believe that these call/cc continuations were created far before threads. Being I don't use either; just wondering if they are similiar. thanx