On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 2:32 PM, leppie <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 5:33 AM, Alex Shinn <[email protected]> wrote: > >> That to me means the effect of the with-exception-handler >>> is to raise an exception handled by some top-level handler. >>> However, the example says the expression evaluates to <unspecified> >>> - i.e. it should actually return. >>> >> >> Yes, that's what will happen - I'll fix that. >> > > Dont miss the line on the next page. > > "After printing, the second example then raises another ex- > ception." > > My understanding is that it will not return. >
Yes, the prose in the R7RS draft is correct. The only confusion was the "=> unspecified" in the example. > Has this changed in any way in R7RS from how R6RS and SRFI-34 works? > No, the R7RS exception system is identical to R6RS. -- Alex
_______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
