Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!newsfeed.mathworks.com!wn13feed!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!attbi_s03.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Raffael Cavallaro <raffaelcavall...@junk.mail.me.not.mac.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: Scheme vs Lisp! [was Re: web application framework]
References: <Pine.LNX.4.56.0311061722200.26007@sixfingeredman.net> <XSOqb.143$KR3.49514@typhoon.nyu.edu> <3FABD814.B3D798EF@sonic.net> <Pine.LNX.4.56.0311071640540.413@sixfingeredman.net> <x0grb.154$KR3.50328@typhoon.nyu.edu> <yfsd6c2joci.fsf@black132.ex.ac.uk> <ktvrb.58643$Gq.12004553@twister.nyc.rr.com> <bom1l3$5i4$1@newsreader2.netcologne.de> <sfwy8um7xt6.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <bothqb$q7k$1@f1node01.rhrz.uni-bonn.de> <wk1xsdb9qr.fsf@nhplace.com>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.2 (PPC Mac OS X)
Message-ID: <raffaelcavallaro-913350.23180713112003@netnews.attbi.com>
Lines: 16
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.31.43.251
X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net
X-Trace: attbi_s03 1068783488 66.31.43.251 (Fri, 14 Nov 2003 04:18:08 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 04:18:08 GMT
Organization: Comcast Online
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 04:18:08 GMT

In article <wk1xsdb9qr....@nhplace.com>,
 Kent M Pitman <pit...@nhplace.com> wrote:

> The term "procedural embedding of information" really captures the
> critical side of what I'm trying to say.

So would it be fair to characterize one of your objections as:
continuations store state implicitly, while other methods (CLOS objects, 
for example) store state explicitly?

Just asking for clarification, because that's what I'm hearing, but it 
may be because that's what I dislike about continuations myself. I 
dislike methodologies that store information implicitly because they 
make debugging more difficult.

Raf