I would do something like: (define ch (make-channel)) (submit-job! jq (lambda () (define ans ...) (channel-put ch ans))) (channel-get ch ans)
This will synchronously wait for the job to finish. Presumably you'd do this when you already started up the workers and from a context where you have a lot of jobs running. Jay On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Dan Liebgold <dan_liebg...@naughtydog.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 at 10:38:05 AM UTC-8, Jay McCarthy wrote: >> The typed-racket code returns a value from the job, whereas this code >> assumes the job is fully self-contained. Perhaps job-queue should >> protect itself from job exceptions. >> > > BTW, how would you recommend returning a value from a job in job-queue? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Racket Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Jay McCarthy Associate Professor PLT @ CS @ UMass Lowell http://jeapostrophe.github.io "Wherefore, be not weary in well-doing, for ye are laying the foundation of a great work. And out of small things proceedeth that which is great." - D&C 64:33 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
