[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Other Cheney-MTA systems?
From: |
John Cowan |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Other Cheney-MTA systems? |
Date: |
Sat, 13 Nov 2010 13:53:21 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
Peter Bex scripsit:
> What is used instead of CPS nowadays?
The typical view is that it's more important to optimize normal calls
and returns than calls to escape procedures, so a stack is used and then
copied when call/cc is invoked. Chicken allocates stack frames on a
first-generation heap, which means that you are paying to GC that heap,
as well as the (nowadays small) space cost of retaining the C return
addresses on the stack that are never used.
> Does it give you "free" call/cc?
In effect, Chicken call/cc is not free; its cost is amortized over
all calls. However, that cost is paid even by programs that never
use call/cc. (This is not a criticism of Chicken; if you want Gambit
or Bigloo, you know where to find them.)
--
"Well, I'm back." --Sam John Cowan <address@hidden>