What would Squeak be like without non-local returns

Igor Stasenko siguctua at gmail.com
Wed Nov 7 00:19:14 UTC 2007

On 07/11/2007, Rob Withers <reefedjib at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'll just throw this out and see what turns up.   As you have probably
> heard, I am toying with adding eventual refs to Squeak.  Unfortunately, they
> don't play well with non-local returns.  Igor and I had been discussing what
> could be done with methods having non-local returns adn it is looking nasty.
>   So I thought to look at another piece of the puzzle and question its
> existence.

I don't think that their existence are questionable.
Their have own purpose and in example you shown it proves that using
non-local returns is much more convenient and easier for developer.
If there are problems between exceptions/non-local returns and
eventual refs, then they must be solved in one way or another but
without sacrificing other language features.
When i started my comments about need of special care with any stack
unwinding operations i just wanted to point that you must take special
care. It not that easy as removing non-local returns, but its
solvable. So, i think, a better direction is to find a solution rather
than looking how to put new feature by removing old one.

Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list