|
Per-process vs per-thread current-directory once more Lassi Kortela (02 Aug 2020 19:36 UTC)
|
|
Re: Per-process vs per-thread current-directory once more
John Cowan
(02 Aug 2020 20:44 UTC)
|
|
Re: Per-process vs per-thread current-directory once more
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(03 Aug 2020 07:30 UTC)
|
|
Re: Per-process vs per-thread current-directory once more
Lassi Kortela
(03 Aug 2020 08:04 UTC)
|
|
Re: Per-process vs per-thread current-directory once more
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(03 Aug 2020 12:12 UTC)
|
|
Re: Per-process vs per-thread current-directory once more
Lassi Kortela
(03 Aug 2020 12:20 UTC)
|
|
Re: Per-process vs per-thread current-directory once more
Lassi Kortela
(03 Aug 2020 08:08 UTC)
|
|
Re: Per-process vs per-thread current-directory once more
Lassi Kortela
(03 Aug 2020 08:17 UTC)
|
|
Re: Per-process vs per-thread current-directory once more
Lassi Kortela
(03 Aug 2020 08:25 UTC)
|
Per-process vs per-thread current-directory once more Lassi Kortela 02 Aug 2020 19:36 UTC
Did we reach a definite decision on per-process vs per-thread CWD? The latest 170 draft seems written to suggest (but not very obviously) that the CWD is always per-process. I still think it would be clearer to use a per-thread CWD in Scheme implementations where that is the custom. If current-directory is a parameter object, it could be temporarily bound to #f to fall back to the per-process OS CWD.