Finally clauses
Tony Garnock-Jones
(09 Aug 2002 14:05 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses
Dave Mason
(09 Aug 2002 14:58 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses
Richard Kelsey
(09 Aug 2002 23:28 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses
Tony Garnock-Jones
(12 Aug 2002 11:24 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses
Richard Kelsey
(13 Aug 2002 00:48 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses
Tony Garnock-Jones
(13 Aug 2002 17:35 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses
Richard Kelsey
(15 Aug 2002 01:47 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses Tony Garnock-Jones (15 Aug 2002 11:11 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses
bear
(15 Aug 2002 15:19 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses
sperber@xxxxxx
(29 Aug 2002 08:08 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses
bear
(01 Sep 2002 20:55 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses
Richard Kelsey
(01 Sep 2002 22:22 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses
bear
(04 Sep 2002 03:07 UTC)
|
Re: Finally clauses
Richard Kelsey
(04 Sep 2002 06:55 UTC)
|
> it will write "exiting" twice, once for the raise and once > for the normal return. When would you use such a "finally"? You're right, restarts will complicate matters. But since they aren't part of this SRFI, we don't have to worry about them unless we want to :-) Restarts complicate matters for *all* exception handlers, though. Once they enter the picture, you have to be careful about side-effecting in any delegating exception handler, whether it's a finally clause or not. Tony