Re: Add further conversions between data-directed and code-directed programming idioms Lassi Kortela (07 Jun 2020 12:18 UTC)
Low-level vs high-level exceptions Lassi Kortela (07 Jun 2020 13:59 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (07 Jun 2020 15:46 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions John Cowan (08 Jun 2020 14:29 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (08 Jun 2020 14:36 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (08 Jun 2020 14:52 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Jun 2020 06:11 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (09 Jun 2020 13:04 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions John Cowan (14 Jun 2020 00:59 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (14 Jun 2020 10:38 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions John Cowan (14 Jun 2020 14:57 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (14 Jun 2020 15:32 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (14 Jun 2020 15:42 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions John Cowan (16 Jun 2020 01:58 UTC)
Re: Low-level vs high-level exceptions Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (16 Jun 2020 07:33 UTC)

Re: Add further conversions between data-directed and code-directed programming idioms Lassi Kortela 07 Jun 2020 12:18 UTC

> It's not yet clear to me whether it is a good idea (Lassi would say
> whether it is "The Right Thing") to transform Posix signals into
> exceptions

Sounds quite dangerous. Signals and threads go together like diet coke
and mentos :)

As one pitfall, there must be a decision in which thread the signal
handler is run and whether or not other threads are stopped. Some OSes
even have a separate signal stack. I'm sure there are many more footguns
involving I/O interruptions, continuations and FFI for starters.

> but I agree with you that catching every exception by
> default can be very dangerous.

+1

> Anyway, for the moment being, I would, therefore, revise my proposal to:
>
> (either <thunk> <pred>)
>
> This can be used as in: (either read read-error?)

LGTM