--zhXaljGHf11kAtnf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 01:47:06PM +0900, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Aaron Patterson
> <aaron / tenderlovemaking.com> wrote:
> >> 1. subroutines are a specialization of coroutines. Then it's perfectly
> >> valid for subroutines to define things coroutines do not.
> >
> > Yes, but it is *not* perfectly valid for subroutines to *not* define
> > things that coroutines do.  ¨ֲדבויפטוע עוףןלצפטבפ גש הוזימימח
> > "resume" on Proc, or "call" and "[]" on Fiber.
> ...
> > I have been trying to choose reality number 1, the entire time, but
> > apparently I cannot explain myself clearly. :'(
> 
> But doesn't reality 1 mean that subroutines should get resume/etc and
> coroutines should *not* get call/[]? It seems to me you either want my
> reality 3 or Jim's reality 4.

I don't know anymore.  I guess I don't care anymore either.

-- 
Aaron Patterson
http://tenderlovemaking.com/

--zhXaljGHf11kAtnf
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNRfOsAAoJEJUxcLy0/6/GlmgH/26IjmvuzM+5Z76E919qrtgd
i4qjkMCkV+JAi8X+uOz3lmRhdBtMbZchrKd9B2f5u1PB/ZDNcVP+x9cmqS52/2VB
C0IzT37KTK1k3P8UeTw9FQGW4/HMznKxVffo/aw0iw5rqFrJjumRJeBykjxfV32W
nfMtxfIa1tkX7N++gqs2Z3H4MYJFmLeXKn8rrBkjXStMsJLtRXrdiL3Rk4lAGS5F
xCppV16r0j9CFuL3UuhtG3AaXqjPw/KgUDergN0eEHNlZ95S5NsCAXONjk8VRPJm
ZkH32NNoummloB/itzaUmjJu1fxG7v4UoRtYW725dRTO4Zi/zYdEUdCOKn7/TIsvv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--zhXaljGHf11kAtnf--