[gambit-list] call/cc behavior in gambit-c vs. plt-scheme
Cristian Baboi
cristi at ot.onrc.ro
Wed Jun 11 08:17:44 EDT 2008
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:06:24 +0300, Marc Feeley <feeley at iro.umontreal.ca>
wrote:
> How did you enter the code for evaluation? Did you type it in to PLT's
> REPL and loaded it from a file in Gambit?
No. I typed it in notepad, then loaded it from the file in both cases.
> The behaviour of Gambit's "load" is to treat the content of the file as
> a complete sequence of commands/expressions. It is as though the
> sequence was wrapped in a "begin" form. Equivalently, in this case, it
> is as though the whole code was in the body of a toplevel procedure
> definition which is called once, as in:
I understand why. I was just surprised by the difference in behavior.
> I'm actually surprised that PLT does not do the same. Most probably
> PLT's "load" is modeled on the REPL (i.e. it is a read-eval-print loop
> which simply takes its input from a file).
The thing is that in PLT, at the top level, (coco 13) will return 13
> I think Gambit's model is cleaner, as it allows to have the same
> semantics for load whether the file being loaded is source code or
> compiled code.
I asked because it is not clear to me if there is some standard that
prescribe how the top level should behave and I was surprised by the
different results. In both cases I've run the file by calling (load
"test.scm").
Thank you.
________ Information from NOD32 ________
This message was checked by NOD32 Antivirus System for Linux Mail Servers.
part000.txt - is OK
http://www.eset.com
More information about the Gambit-list
mailing list