On 05/11/2013 10:08 PM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
Ryan Culpepper wrote at 05/11/2013 06:34 PM:
Yes. I just pushed a workaround.
Thank you for this, Ryan! Regarding the "FIXME" comment: would you say
this fix is ready for production use?
Probably. That function is certainly wrong as a general-purpose port
constructor, but it should be safe for the way that particular port gets
used (no concurrent access, not used as a synchronizable event, etc).
The test suite runs with one failure (related to disconnect after a
custodian shutdown), which I believe is related to SSL ports and not to
the buffering wrapper port.
Ryan
____________________
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
