[plt-scheme] Re: Semantics of ec?

On Feb 16, 2006, at 11:38 AM, David Van Horn wrote:

> Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>> On Feb 16, 2006, at 7:33 AM, David Van Horn wrote:
>>> Is a reduction semantics for "escape only" continuations available 
>>> in the literature somewhere (or any other semantics for that 
>>> matter)?
>> Cartwright, Curien, Felleisen: Fully abstract models of observably 
>> sequential languages. Info. Comp. 111(2). 1994. 297--401.
>
> Thanks for the reference.  I was wondering if there is something that 
> gives the reduction semantics for call/ec, which I could contrast with 
> the usual reduction semantics of call/cc, ie. I'm interested in how 
> the notion "an escape continuation is only valid when the current 
> continuation is an extension of the escape continuation" is 
> formalized.

That's precisely what the op sem in this paper for catch does. If 
you're asking for an error-message version of the op sem, you need to 
mix and match the catch the semantics with the call/cc semantics. You 
may end up with Mike Sperber's rewriting semantics for dynamic-wind in 
the end. -- Matthias