[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: non-local exits are icky

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.

To: Tom Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: non-local exits are icky
From: Michael Sperber <sperber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 16:41:55 +0100
Cc: srfi-50@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: srfi-50@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200312232331.PAA19112@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Tom Lord's message of "Tue, 23 Dec 2003 15:31:35 -0800 (PST)")
References: <200312232331.PAA19112@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Gnus/5.090019 (Oort Gnus v0.19) XEmacs/21.5 (celeriac, berkeley-unix)

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lord <lord@xxxxxxx> writes:

Tom> With non-local exits, you'll also need a mechanism for unwind
Tom> protection within C code.

Sure, but that's an implementation issue.

-- 
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla

Follow-Ups:
- Re: non-local exits are icky
  - From: Tom Lord

References:
- non-local exits are icky
  - From: Tom Lord

Prev by Date: Re: GC safety and return values
Next by Date: Re: maybe pika
Previous by thread: non-local exits are icky
Next by thread: Re: non-local exits are icky
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread