From: Kevin Ryde <user42@zip.com.au>
Subject: Re: Backtrace and enhanced catch
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:29:49 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <871wyu8t5e.fsf@zip.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87acebhf1o.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> (Neil Jerram's message of "Wed, 04 Jan 2006 21:13:55 +0000")
Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:
>
> The difference is that the enclosing call approach allows
> code inbetween the lazy-catch and the error point to decide on a
> different, more local strategy for handling the error, whereas the
> hook approach doesn't. I think it's clear that the enclosing call
> approach is better,
Yes. Making a local decision is what I always seem to use lazy-catch
for, in my case trapping selected system call errors but not
interfering with the backtrace of others.
> the lazy-catch doc says that its handler must not return,
It'd be nice if that could be relaxed, if it was easy to do. In a
couple of places I've wanted to return and continue past the
lazy-catch form, having taken whatever action in the handler. (An
extra wrapping full `catch' makes that possible.)
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-26 23:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-01 0:16 gh_inexact_p error in 1.7.x Bruce Korb
2005-12-01 0:44 ` Kevin Ryde
2005-12-05 4:08 ` No way out Bruce Korb
2005-12-05 4:35 ` Bruce Korb
2005-12-07 1:31 ` Marius Vollmer
2005-12-05 22:20 ` Kevin Ryde
2005-12-06 10:58 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2005-12-28 15:59 ` Neil Jerram
2005-12-31 15:09 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2005-12-31 15:14 ` Neil Jerram
2006-01-01 19:58 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2006-01-02 15:42 ` Neil Jerram
2006-01-02 18:54 ` Neil Jerram
2006-01-04 21:13 ` Backtrace and enhanced catch Neil Jerram
2006-01-14 12:41 ` Neil Jerram
2006-01-22 13:47 ` Marius Vollmer
2006-01-23 20:11 ` Neil Jerram
2006-01-24 21:34 ` Marius Vollmer
2006-01-16 8:38 ` Ludovic Courtès
2006-01-18 23:08 ` Neil Jerram
2006-01-19 9:38 ` Ludovic Courtès
2006-01-21 11:26 ` Neil Jerram
2006-01-26 23:29 ` Kevin Ryde [this message]
2006-01-27 19:30 ` Neil Jerram
2006-01-31 20:07 ` Kevin Ryde
2006-02-01 23:04 ` Neil Jerram
2006-02-04 0:46 ` Kevin Ryde
2006-02-04 15:41 ` Neil Jerram
2005-12-07 1:07 ` No way out Marius Vollmer
2005-12-07 1:55 ` Rob Browning
2005-12-13 20:32 ` Marius Vollmer
2005-12-28 16:09 ` Neil Jerram
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=871wyu8t5e.fsf@zip.com.au \
--to=user42@zip.com.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).