lobsters score: 4 · tags: lisp
I guess I could be non-lazy and look this up but in the spirit of engaging: Does CHICKEN still use the “Cheney on the MTA” approach where it compiles to C and implements continuations with CPS and dynamic allocations with alloca on the C stack, treating stack overflows as a trigger for stack-copying GC? Assuming I’m remembering that correctly. If so, how has that worked out over the years? I mostly stopped using or following Scheme in the mid-2000s, so the quirky compilation approach is what I remember it for the most, as a compiler nerd.
score 2 · canonical
It still does. It works wonderfully well as a relatively cheap way to offer full continuations without caveats
score 1 · canonical
Thank you @veqq for asking good questions and fleshing this out into a coherent story!
score 1 · canonical
It appears near the very bottom of the interview, but I think it’s super important: pedagogy of programming, especially in the context of programmers teaching their own children. I think we’re at once in a very privileged but also cursed position.
LOGO the programming language is simply beautiful from a pedagogical perspective, and I’ve done a bit of Logo programming with my kids when they were younger. IBM Logo in dosbox was what I ended up going with – there is a fantastic immediacy to the system that you don’t often see nowadays. I think the closest we get is PICO-8.
Curious if other parent lobsters have experiences with LOGO programming. Seems to have been a big thing in Europe in the 80’s and early 90’s, but not so much across the pond.
score 1 · canonical