Posted
by Jake
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by Jake
Published on 2010-05-13T16:41:46Z
Indexed on
2010/05/13
16:44 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 359
(callcc (fun k -> k 7)) + 3
(callcc (fun k -> 7)) + 3
What do each of these evaluate to and why?
© Stack Overflow or respective owner
as seen on Stack Overflow
- Search for 'Stack Overflow'
(callcc (fun k -> k 7)) + 3
(callcc (fun k -> 7)) + 3
What do each of these evaluate to and why?
>>> More
as seen on Stack Overflow
- Search for 'Stack Overflow'
I'm trying to grasp the semantics of call/cc in Scheme, and the Wikipedia page on continuations shows the yin-yang puzzle as an example:
(let* ((yin
((lambda (cc) (display #\@) cc) (call-with-current-continuation (lambda (c) c))))
(yang
((lambda (cc) (display #\*) cc) (call-with-current-continuation…
>>> More
as seen on Stack Overflow
- Search for 'Stack Overflow'
The Wikipedia article on Continuation says:
"In any language which supports closures, it is possible to write programs in continuation passing style and manually implement call/cc."
Either that is true and I need to know how to do it or it is not true and that statement needs to be corrected.
If this…
>>> More
as seen on Stack Overflow
- Search for 'Stack Overflow'
Hi All,
I need to understand Continuations in Scheme for my upcoming exams and I have no idea about continuations at all. Can anyone please suggest me sources of how to go about learning continuations?
Regards,
darkie
>>> More
as seen on Stack Overflow
- Search for 'Stack Overflow'
The following function generates a 'stack level too deep (SystemStackError)' for n = 5,000
def factorial(n)
n == 0 ? 1 : factorial(n -1) * n
end
Is there a way to avoid this error using continuations/callcc?
Note:
I know this can be implemented without recursion. e.g.
def factorial2(n)
…
>>> More
as seen on Programmers
- Search for 'Programmers'
This question has been going through my mind quite a lot lately and since I haven't found a convincing answer to it I would like to know if other users
of this site have thought about it as well.
In the recent years, even though OOP is still the most popular programming paradigm, functional programming…
>>> More
as seen on Programmers
- Search for 'Programmers'
This question has been going through my mind quite a lot lately and since I haven't found a convincing answer to it I would like to know if other users
of this site have thought about it as well.
In the recent years, even though OOP is still the most popular programming paradigm, functional programming…
>>> More
as seen on Stack Overflow
- Search for 'Stack Overflow'
I recently started studying functional programming using Haskell and came upon this article on the official Haskell wiki: How to read Haskell.
The article claims that short variable names such as x, xs, and f are fitting for Haskell code, because of conciseness and abstraction. In essence, it claims…
>>> More
as seen on Stack Overflow
- Search for 'Stack Overflow'
When would you NOT want to use functional programming? What is it not so good at?
I am more looking for disadvantages of the paradigm as a whole, not things like "not widely used", or "no good debugger available". Those answers may be correct as of now, but they deal with FP being a new concept (an…
>>> More
as seen on Stack Overflow
- Search for 'Stack Overflow'
It seems to me that functional programming is a great thing. It eliminates state and makes it much easier to automatically make code run in parallel.
Many programmers who were first taught imperative programming styles find it very difficult to learn functional programming, because it is so different…
>>> More
