After reading Eric Lippert’s answer I got the impression that await and call/cc are pretty much two sides of the same coin, with at most syntactic differences. However, upon trying to actually implement call/cc in C# 5, I ran into a problem: either I misunderstand call/cc (which is fairly possible), or await is only reminiscent of call/cc.
Consider pseudo-code like this:
function main:
foo();
print "Done"
function foo:
var result = call/cc(bar);
print "Result: " + result;
function bar(continuation):
print "Before"
continuation("stuff");
print "After"
If my understanding of call/cc is correct, then this should print:
Before
Result: stuff
Done
Crucially, when the continuation is called, the program state is restored along with the call history, so that foo returns into main and never comes back to bar.
However, if implemented using await in C#, calling the continuation does not restore this call history. foo returns into bar, and there’s no way (that I can see) that await can be used to make the correct call history part of the continuation.
Please explain: did I completely mis-understand the operation of call/cc, or is await just not quite the same as call/cc?
Now that I know the answer, I have to say that there’s a good reason to think of them as fairly similar. Consider what the above program looks like in pseudo-C#-5:
function main:
foo();
print "Done"
async function foo:
var result = await(bar);
print "Result: " + result;
async function bar():
print "Before"
return "stuff";
print "After"
So while the C# 5 style never gives us a continuation object to pass a value to, overall the similarity is quite striking. Except that this time it’s totally obvious that “After” never gets called, unlike in the true-call/cc example, which is another reason to love C# and praise its design!
awaitis indeed not quite the same ascall/cc.The kind of totally fundamental
call/ccthat you are thinking of would indeed have to save and restore the entire call stack. Butawaitis just a compile-time transformation. It does something similar, but not using the real call stack.Imagine you have an async function containing an await expression:
Now imagine that the function you call via
awaititself contains anawaitexpression:Now think about what happens when
DoSomethingImportant()finishes and its result is available. Control returns toDoSomething(). ThenDoSomething()finishes and what happens then? Control returns toGetInt(). The behaviour is exactly as it would be ifGetInt()were on the call stack. But it isn’t really; you have to useawaitat every call that you want simulated this way. Thus, the call stack is lifted into a meta-call-stack that is implemented in the awaiter.The same, incidentally, is true of
yield return:Now if I call
GetInts(), what I get back is an object that encapsulates the current execution state ofGetInts()(so that callingMoveNext()on it resumes operation where it left off). This object itself contains the iterator that is iterating throughGetStrings()and callsMoveNext()on that. Thus, the real call stack is replaced by a hierarchy of objects which recreate the correct call stack each time via a series of calls toMoveNext()on the next inner object.