|Thunk routines DAVEJ3@Prodigy.Net (DAVEJ3) (1998-02-20)|
|Re: Thunk routines firstname.lastname@example.org (1998-03-03)|
|Re: Thunk routines email@example.com (1998-03-03)|
|Re: Thunk routines Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com (Nick Roberts) (1998-03-06)|
|Re: Thunk routines firstname.lastname@example.org (1998-03-06)|
|From:||email@example.com (Gene Wirchenko)|
|Date:||6 Mar 1998 16:50:26 -0500|
|Organization:||All USENET -- http://www.Supernews.com|
firstname.lastname@example.org (Scott Amspoker) wrote:
>DAVEJ3 <DAVEJ3@Prodigy.Net> wrote:
>>Does anybody know where the routine name Thunk came from?
>>[It was coined about 1960 to describe the callback routines needed to
>>implement call-by-name, shortly after the Algol60 committee realized
>>they'd invented call-by-name by mistake. -John]
>Thank you for the reality check on "thunk". For ages I always thought that's
>what it was (used to implement call-by-name) but it seems that the usage has
>changed in recent years - refering to a glue layer between incompatible
>modules. I figured I remembered incorrectly.
Considering how call by name has to be implemented, the current
definition applies to it as well. There has been a discussion of call
by name on alt.folklore.computers recently.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.