Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Oct 2022 09:56 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Shiro Kawai (09 Oct 2022 10:41 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Oct 2022 11:21 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Shiro Kawai (09 Oct 2022 12:46 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Oct 2022 13:07 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Shiro Kawai (09 Oct 2022 13:26 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Oct 2022 13:58 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Shiro Kawai (09 Oct 2022 22:50 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (10 Oct 2022 05:57 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (10 Oct 2022 07:24 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Shiro Kawai (10 Oct 2022 07:25 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (10 Oct 2022 07:39 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Shiro Kawai (10 Oct 2022 08:57 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (10 Oct 2022 08:59 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect John Cowan (09 Oct 2022 15:03 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Oct 2022 15:13 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Oct 2022 15:39 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Oct 2022 16:13 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Lassi Kortela (09 Oct 2022 15:41 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Oct 2022 16:11 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (28 Oct 2022 11:08 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Vincent Manis (28 Oct 2022 18:53 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (28 Oct 2022 18:58 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Vincent Manis (28 Oct 2022 19:14 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (28 Oct 2022 19:28 UTC)
Re: Unwind-protect Arthur A. Gleckler (28 Oct 2022 19:31 UTC)

Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen 09 Oct 2022 09:55 UTC

John Cowan suggested that SRFI 226 should include a version of Common
Lisp's unwind-protect suitable for Scheme.

In [1], I replied after some discussion with the following proposal
for a definition of a Scheme unwind-protect:

(define-syntax unwind-protect
  (syntax-rules ()
    ((unwind-protect protected-form cleanup-form)
     (call-with-continuation-barrier
       (lambda ()
         (dynamic-wind
           (lambda () (values))
           (lambda () protected-form)
           (lambda () cleanup-form)))))))

As I think it is essential to get this famous form right when included
in a fundamental SRFI like SRFI 226, I would like to hear more
opinions on the above form.

(It should be noted, that Scheme procedures like
`call-with-input-file` are not based on unwind-protect semantics.)

Should there be no consensus on unwind-protect, it is probably better
to reserve an extra SRFI for it (which, in turn, can depend on SRFI
226).

Thanks for taking a look,

Marc

--

[1] https://srfi-email.schemers.org/srfi-226/msg/20888154/