Francis McCabe

depends on what you want to do about exceptions, performance, any implicit shared state etc. etc. I prefer to design top-down, implement bottom-up.

TBH, I am not certain that they are equivalent today. What happens if cat throws? What about the arguments to the function itself? Today, they are only equivalent if the...

@rossberg I do not follow the logic of "which is the what catching and coercing exceptions really means". If you catch, coerce and rethrow, how have you not communicated the...

I am not sure that I fully buy the desugaring argument for cont.bind. My reasoning is that that desugaring (into a resume followed by a suspend) requires changing the operand....

I would push back against the 'do it later' argument. This is (IMO) a potentially critical optimization for Kotlin & Swift (for different reasons). Remember that, in the best case,...

I am 'ok' with keeping the left-to-right ordering. Just know that you are baking in additional complexity and performance costs for the foreseeable future.

This: https://github.com/WebAssembly/annotations/blob/main/document/core/appendix/custom.rst#:~:text=If%20both%20an%20identifier%20and%20a%20name%20annotation%20are%20given%2C%20the%20annotation%20is%20expected%20after%20the%20identifier suggests that the annotation should go after the name being annotated. That is also consistent with how Java annotations work.

Yes, I was inferring a general rule from one example :)

continuation types & the signature types they reference can be mutually recursive. So, what sort of simplification are you referring to?

I see. In fact, I complained to Andreas about this exact issue :) I had to add in an extra loop in the type decoder. It does, however, mess up...