[gambit-list] call/cc behavior in gambit-c vs. plt-scheme

Matthew Flatt mflatt at cs.utah.edu
Wed Jun 11 10:42:56 EDT 2008


At Wed, 11 Jun 2008 08:06:24 -0400, Marc Feeley wrote:
> 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).  So the continuation stored  
> in coco is really:
> 
> (lambda (result)
>    (display "again")
>    (newline)
>    (display "end")
>    (newline)
>    (next-iteration-of-the-load-repl))
> 
> But when (next-iteration-of-the-load-repl) is called, it will read end- 
> of-file and thus exit load's read-eval-print loop.
> 
> 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.

For what it's worth, here's what PLT Scheme actually does:

 * Every top-level form is wrapped with a prompt.

 * `begin' at the top level splices. Consequently, each sub-form within
   a top-level `begin' is also wrapped with a prompt.

That's why `(coco 13)' after the `load' produces 13, instead of an
error about a closed file.

[ If anyone wonders what I mean by "prompt", see
     http://www.cs.utah.edu/plt/publications/icfp07-fyff.pdf     ]


It's true that `load' in PLT Scheme reads and evaluates forms from a
file one-by-one, but still with prompts. That can be consistent with
compiling the forms one-by-one to produce a file whose compiled
fragments are evaluated one-by-one. In particular, the prompts around
sub-forms in a top-level `begin' help keep everything consistent
(without having say, for example, that `begin' only sort of "splices"
into the top level). Concretely, try compiling Cristian's example with
`mzc --zo' and `load' the resulting ".zo" file.


Of course, `load' in neither Gambit nor PLT Scheme really makes
evaluation from source consistent with evaluation of compiled code ---
not when macros get involved. Given how the Scheme top-level is
hopeless in this respect, PLT Scheme leaves most problems of
compiled-vs-source consistency to the module system, and we see `load'
as a tool similar to REPL evaluation. From that perspective, prompts
play a role in making `load' and REPL evaluation more consistent with
each other.

Matthew



More information about the Gambit-list mailing list