On Sat, 29 Oct 2005, Alan Watson wrote:

>bear wrote:
>> I think that when a "live" error object is stored or written, it
>> should be possible to read it back and get a value that says
>> an error object was stored or written.  But what you read back
>> should be a "stale" error object, so you can tell the difference
>> between a "live" error and a "stored and recovered" error.
>
>Why is this useful?

With (read) capable of executing arbitrary code via quote,
etc. it is entirely possible for (read) to encounter an
error.  I want to know whether an error returned from (read)
is one that was written and read, or one that prevented
correct reading from occurring.

				Bear