On Wed 09 Jan 2013 03:07, Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x> writes:
> Secondly, its presence prohibits useful behaviors. For example, it
> would be easy to make a `call-with-port' that closes its port on
> exceptional exits by installing a throw handler. However, since
> handlers are also used for raise-continuable, this is not possible.
> Releasing resources can be done manually at the programmerMy point is precisely that you cannot implement this behavior when
> level with their own exception handlers, even wrapping common
> patterns such as `call-with-port/close-on-exception'.
raise-continuable follows the same dispatch as raise.
> Guardians also allow for easy and arbitrary finalization.Please. Relying on GC to run (and thus adding ports to guardians) is
not a solution in cases of limited resources like file descriptors.
_______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list Scheme-reports@x http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports