SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
Arthur A. Gleckler
(26 Jun 2020 02:31 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
John Cowan
(26 Jun 2020 02:39 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(26 Jun 2020 06:02 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
hga@xxxxxx
(26 Jun 2020 14:44 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(26 Jun 2020 15:22 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
John Cowan
(27 Jun 2020 04:03 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
Shiro Kawai
(27 Jun 2020 09:52 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
Shiro Kawai
(27 Jun 2020 09:53 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
hga@xxxxxx
(27 Jun 2020 10:55 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
Shiro Kawai
(27 Jun 2020 11:12 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation Lassi Kortela (27 Jun 2020 11:26 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
John Cowan
(27 Jun 2020 14:47 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
hga@xxxxxx
(27 Jun 2020 15:05 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
Lassi Kortela
(27 Jun 2020 15:12 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
hga@xxxxxx
(27 Jun 2020 15:40 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
Lassi Kortela
(27 Jun 2020 15:47 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
Shiro Kawai
(27 Jun 2020 17:51 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 199: POSIX errno manipulation
John Cowan
(27 Jun 2020 15:49 UTC)
|
I agree with Marc and Shiro that there should not be a global procedure to get the current errno value. The dynamic duo of threads and signals will be sure to mess this one up -- plus the usual caveats about FFI. Each Scheme wrapper for a POSIX syscall should return the errno value after the call as a fixnum (where zero means "no error"). I can't see any other safe way to do it.