[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Name for BABY-DOE should not include "values".

To: rrrs-authors@life.ai.mit.edu
Subject: Name for BABY-DOE should not include "values".
From: ramsdell@linus.mitre.org
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 89 08:53:08 EDT
Cc: ramsdell@linus.mitre.org
In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 01 Sep 89 16:31:46 -0400. <8909012031.AA10876@zurich.ai.mit.edu>
Posted-Date: Tue, 05 Sep 89 08:53:08 EDT
Posted-From: The MITRE Corp., Bedford, MA

I prefer a name for BABY-DOE which does not include the word "values".
The reason is that I believe such names are misleading.  In my
opinion, BABY-DOE gives me a way of creating an unusual continuation
to be used during a call of a thunk.  It is unusual because it splices
in a call of a procedure into the current continuation.  The important
fact about BABY-DOE is not that it calls a procedure with some values.
Please verify my point by studying the formal semantics.

Unfortunately, I have not yet come up with a good alternative name.
Here are some of my current tries:

CALL-PREFIXING-CONTINUATION

CALL-SPLICING-CONTINUATION

CALL-FORWARDING

CONNECT

LINK

CPS-CALL for "Continuation Passing Style CALL"

John

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Name for BABY-DOE should not include "values".
  - From: Pavel.pa@xerox.com

References:
- An alternate description of the multiple values proposal
  - From: cph (Chris Hanson)

Prev by Date: Programmer-defined data types, last (?) version
Next by Date: Re: An alternate description of the multiple values proposal
Prev by thread: An alternate description of the multiple values proposal
Next by thread: Re: Name for BABY-DOE should not include "values".
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread