Piers Cawley <pdcawley@[...].uk>  writes:

>  "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" <Thomas.Sandlass@[...].com> writes:
> 
> > Piers Cawley wrote:
> >> My preference is for:
> >>     Boo
> >>     Boo
> >>     Can't dereferene literal numeric literal 42 as a coderef.
> >
> > How do you reach the second 'Boo'? Iff -> does not create a Sub
> > but a Block instance then Luke's code can be interpreted as a
> > much smarter version of
> 
>  I really wish you'd quote in more detail, it makes it a real PITA to go back
>  and find the explanatory code.  
> 
>      sub foo () {
>        return -> { return 42 }
>      }
> 
>      my $code =   foo();
>      #          ^--- continuations points to the RHS of the assignment
>      say "Boo!";
>      $code();
> 
>  So, this is what happens.
> 
>  1. foo() returns a coderef to the RHS of the assignment.
>  2. The coderef gets assigned to $code.
>  3. say "Boo!"
>  4. We invoke the coderef, which returns 14 to continuation which was current
>     when it was created.
>  5. That means 42 gets returned to the RHS of the assignment
>  6. say "Boo!"
>  7. Try to invoke the literal 42. 
>  8. Die.
> 
>  In other words, it outputs:
> 
>     Foo
>     Foo
>     # dies


If that works, then I think it means we can write:

    sub call-with-current-continuation(Code $code) {
        my $cc = ->  $retval { return $retval }
        $code($cc);
    }

Which I personally think is rather cute. Even if I can't quite bring myself to
believe it's that simple...