This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 50 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 50 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
On Sat, 31 Jan 2004, Tom Lord wrote: > > > From: bear <bear@xxxxxxxxx> > > > >The lock/unlock pattern can solve it -- not in the general case but in > > >a useful way -- and is quite portable. > > > This is true -- but impossible within the context of the current draft of > > the SRFI because there is no call to hang the unlock() method on. > >I don't understand. The unlock() should be an explicit part of the >FFI (when/if r/w-sharing-semantics string extraction is added). Right. My original point was that r/w sharing semantics were unsupportable under the current draft (ie, without an unlock() call) of the SRFI and we needed to warn application developers of this fact. Bear