(j3.2006) an alternative to Aleks' asynchronous proposal

Aleksandar Donev donev1
Fri Jun 20 12:52:09 EDT 2008

On Friday 20 June 2008 08:05, Lionel, Steve wrote:
> It is not true that the subroutine "is no longer executing". ?The
> subroutine may (and in this case has) started an asynchronous activity
> that continues execution, potentially, after the call returns.
I understand that, I was making a point about the lack of clarity in the 
language Dick used, making it inappropriate for a standard. We don't have the 
concept of "continuing subroutine execution", and unless we add it, the 
routine is no longer executing, according to our definition of execution 

More information about the J3 mailing list