> The book has no exercises. This positions it awkwardly in the broader perspective of compiler study. It’s as if it’s a book that isn’t meant to be studied or understood, or perhaps it just doesn’t care.

I bought it because it demonstrated how to cps-transform code, which was my goal. I think it delivered.

For a "broader perspective", see the follow-up papers:

  Compiling with Continuations, Continued (2007) (Cited by 154)” “The Essence of Compiling with Continuations (1993) (Cited by 806)” “Compiling with continuations, or without? whatever. (2019) (Cited by 34)”

FWIW, after I implemented CPS this way, I eventually switched to ANF for typing reasons. I'm a bit of a beginner at type inference and could not assign a meaningful type to the extra term ("continuation") that CPS produces (and which ANF does not).