Group Email Manager

login signup
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: Low-level vs high-level exceptions Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe 09 Jun 2020 13:03 UTC 
On 2020-06-09 08:11 +0200, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen wrote:
> What about `either-guard' instead?
>
> ... We
> could make `either-guard' into syntax (so that it takes a body instead
> of a thunk). For compiler optimizations, it may even be beneficial. So
> the original example would read:
>
> (either-guard read-error?
>   (read))

This seems like a good name for a very useful form.  I'd be happy
to see it added.

--
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe  <xxxxxx@sigwinch.xyz>

"Fools ignore complexity.  Pragmatists suffer it.  Some can avoid it.
Geniuses remove it." --Alan J. Perlis