On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 07:44:19AM +0100, felix winkelmann wrote:
On 10/31/07, Ozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, I think I understand what you're getting it. Unfortunately I can't get
it to
work. You'll have to excuse the thrown-together quality of the code below,
but
it
On 10/31/07, Peter Bex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The exit will not invoke any pending dynamic-wind thunks
Why not? Shouldn't it? IMHO it violates POLA not to do so.
Because it might not be desired. It shouldn't. And I don't know who POLA
is, nor did I meeet her before.
cheers,
felix
On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 10:24:44AM +0100, felix winkelmann wrote:
On 10/31/07, Peter Bex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The exit will not invoke any pending dynamic-wind thunks
Why not? Shouldn't it? IMHO it violates POLA not to do so.
Because it might not be desired.
Why wouldn't it if
On 10/31/07, Peter Bex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 10:24:44AM +0100, felix winkelmann wrote:
On 10/31/07, Peter Bex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The exit will not invoke any pending dynamic-wind thunks
Why not? Shouldn't it? IMHO it violates POLA not to do so.
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
On 10/31/07, Peter Bex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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.
This has nothing to do with the standard. exit is not a standard
On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 12:09:27PM +0100, felix winkelmann wrote:
On 10/31/07, Peter Bex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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.
Ozzi wrote:
Thomas Christian Chust wrote:
I think it would suffice for daemonize to wrap the call to the daemon's
main procedure in a dynamic-wind block and call the cleanup function
from the exit thunk. Unless the daemon procedure terminates itself with
a low-level _exit or by sending
Thomas Christian Chust wrote:
I think it would suffice for daemonize to wrap the call to the daemon's
main procedure in a dynamic-wind block and call the cleanup function
from the exit thunk. Unless the daemon procedure terminates itself with
a low-level _exit or by sending itself a kill
On 10/31/07, Ozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, I think I understand what you're getting it. Unfortunately I can't get it
to
work. You'll have to excuse the thrown-together quality of the code below, but
it demonstrates the problem I have. Perhaps I am just mis-using dynamic-wind,
or
I
I think it would suffice for daemonize to wrap the call to the daemon's
main procedure in a dynamic-wind block and call the cleanup function
from the exit thunk. Unless the daemon procedure terminates itself with
a low-level _exit or by sending itself a kill signal, the cleanup code
should
Mark Fredrickson wrote:
I think it would suffice for daemonize to wrap the call to the daemon's
main procedure in a dynamic-wind block and call the cleanup function
from the exit thunk. Unless the daemon procedure terminates itself with
a low-level _exit or by sending itself a kill signal,
Ozzi wrote:
Thomas Christian Chust wrote:
I wonder why one would want to pass this cleanup argument to the daemon
procedure -- why should the spawned process simply perform cleanup once
the daemon procedure returns?
The problem with that, as I see it, is that sometimes daemons don't get
um, why not just use (duplicate-fileno (portfileno port)) ? or if its
only stdin/stdout/stderr that youre worried about, calling
(current-[input|output|error]-port) with an argument should change the value.
the above three procs are parameters
(re: the daemon question, i would just use
Elf wrote:
um, why not just use (duplicate-fileno (portfileno port)) ? [...]
Because not the file descriptor of a given port should be duplicated but
rather the file descriptor of a given port should be replaced by a
duplicate of another one.
Of course one could use (portfileno ...) instead
grok that. im trying to get chicken working in visual studio. this does not
rate amongst the 'fun' things i have done. yay work requiring ms os.
-elf
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Alex Queiroz wrote:
Hallo,
On 10/26/07, Elf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
heh, none of these are going to work
Hallo,
On 10/26/07, Elf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
heh, none of these are going to work everywhere. all posix extensions are
custom. the only i/o procs in the standard are call-with-[input|output]file,
with-[input|output]-to-file, current-[input|output]-port,
[input|output]-file?,
Hallo,
On 10/26/07, Elf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(re: the daemon question, i would just use
(foreign-lambda int daemon int int) ,
but thats just me.)
A very nice solution... If it worked (everywhere).
Cheers,
--
-alex
http://www.ventonegro.org/
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Thomas Christian Chust wrote:
Elf wrote:
um, why not just use (duplicate-fileno (portfileno port)) ? [...]
Because not the file descriptor of a given port should be duplicated but
rather the file descriptor of a given port should be replaced by a
duplicate of another
heh, none of these are going to work everywhere. all posix extensions are
custom. the only i/o procs in the standard are call-with-[input|output]file,
with-[input|output]-to-file, current-[input|output]-port, [input|output]-file?,
[open|close]-[input|output]-file, write, display, read, load,
Thomas Christian Chust wrote:
I wonder why one would want to pass this cleanup argument to the daemon
procedure -- why should the spawned process simply perform cleanup once
the daemon procedure returns?
The problem with that, as I see it, is that sometimes daemons don't get to
return
I am working on for creating unix daemons. Can anyone tell me how to redirect
stdout and stderr? I want to redirect them to /dev/null by default.
I would also be interested in comments on my plans for the egg in general.
Presently, the interface is as follows:
daemonize is a function that
22 matches
Mail list logo
