Time to rename Stackless?

[Courageous]

>> It is still stackless in the sense that order of execution is not
>> restricted by the C stack.
>
>Even so, I still think it's a poor name, because it
>focuses on an implementation detail rather than
>telling you what it can do for you.

Possibly. But coming up with a glib sounding name which
is evocative of Stackless' simple purpose might not be
so easy, and meanwhile, most of the people that care about
Stacklessness and continuations are hardcore computer
science junkies, folks who've been exposed to some fairly
obscure languages (sorry, scheme guys!), or people with
very highly specific needs.

C//