M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> IIRC YARV also dropped continuations because they would be slow on the
> YARV VM as well.
> 
> Which does raise an interesting point, though. Call/cc has been
> standard equipment on Scheme for years and nobody has complained about
> performance. How did Ruby manage to paint itself into a "slow
> continuation" corner?

I think it's a matter of how much Ruby has to save to support 
continuations. The C stack, its own Ruby stack, and so on all have a 
higher cost than what e.g. Scheme would need to save.

But I'm no expert on how continuations are implemented in either Ruby or 
Scheme...

- Charlie