Re: [stack] disallowing recursive definitions

On 4/3/08 12:38 PM, "Don Groves" <[email protected]> wrote:
>  
> A few months back, I finally caught on to this: by their nature,
> concatenative languages enforce computation by continuation
> passing. Would it be true to say there is no other way?
> --
> don
> 
But continuation passing surely means something rather complex.
Cancatenative languages interpret concatenations of atomic
programs by starting at the beginning until they reach the
end. For each atom something is changed. That is pretty much
the same for all assembly languages, byte code interpreters etc.
(True at least while not intercepted by a jump or goto).

But as remember, continuation passing means giving
a procedure an additional parameter which represents the
rest of the program, and which will normally be executed
before the procedure returns. Landin¹s papers from the 60¹s
(and at least one much later) are good on this. Look for
³History of continuations² or similar.

  - Manfred



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]