On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 11:23:59AM +0100, felix winkelmann wrote: > > 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.
Well, so be it. I'll add a note to 'extensions to the standard' and the documentation of 'exit' because I'm sure there are more people out there who are not aware of this. Cheers, Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx -- "The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music." -- Donald Knuth
pgpSFLgctP6im.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
