Re: DYNAMIC-WIND vs. multi-processing

[Jeff Dalton <jeff@aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk>]

>    From: jar@cs.cornell.edu (Jonathan Rees)
>    Date: Tue, 11 May 93 13:10:39 -0400

>    If you believe, as Mr. Jaffer apparently does, that it must be
>    possible to write a scheduler in portable Scheme, then I would tend to
>    agree that the low-level non-winding version of CWCC is necessary.

>    I'm not sure I buy that premise, however.  It seems pretty useless to
>    have tasks without pre-emption;
> 
> What about co-routines?  Everything I said about multiple processes
> applies to co-routines.

Hear, hear!  And it is possible (surely) to write coroutines (and a
non-pre-emptive scheduler, if you want one) in portable Scheme.

-- jd