> 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)”

(...which TFA characterised as "parody")

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).