On 10/31/07, Peter Bex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 10:24:44AM +0100, felix winkelmann wrote: > > On 10/31/07, Peter Bex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > The "exit" will not invoke any pending dynamic-wind thunks > > > > > > Why not? Shouldn't it? IMHO it violates POLA not to do so. > > > > Because it might not be desired. > > Why wouldn't it if you use dynamic-wind? The thunk is exited by > calling (exit), isn't it? So I would *expect* it to call the 'after' > part of the dynamic-wind. Just from reading the standard I would never > consider the possibility that a program ever leaves the thunk without > calling the 'after' part. > > People use dynamic-wind because they *want* the 'after' part to be called > whenever the thunk is exited. >
I guess we disagree here. cheers, felix _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
