Re: continuation efficiency

[Thomas Bushnell, BSG]

Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:

> address@hidden (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
> 
> > Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:
> > 
> > > Actually, I think we should have call/ec as a builtin.  
> > 
> > If call/ec is not already a builtin, how is it actually faster than
> > call/cc?
> 
> It uses a different algorithm.  Right now, it needs to be implemented
> in terms of catch/throw, but I'd say that it should be the other way
> around, catch/throw should be implemented in terms of call/ec, and
> call/ec is mostly like call/cc except that it skips the expensive bits
> and makes sure that this doesn't hurt you.

If it's not a builtin, what different algorithm does it use?