Not long ago, Patrick R. Michaud proclaimed... > Personally I like the idea that "any PMC can be thrown as an > exception", which would seem to argue against forcing resume > continuations into the thrown PMC (which might not have a slot > for them). So, rather than saying that anything thrown as an > exception contains its resume continuation, perhaps we should > say that all handlers are invoked with the exception and resume > continuation as arguments, and the single-argument throw simply > takes a continuation at the next instruction to pass to the > handler(s). > > Pm
This proposal has been implemented in the exceptionmagic branch. Looks like all tests are passing there without problem, although I'm not certain about a couple of the languages. Can I get some confirmation from someone else on the desirability of this proposal?
