Mark H Weaver <[email protected]> writes:
> Nala Ginrut <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Is there still problem? I'm fine with the patch, and I'm expecting to
>> merge it ASAP. Anyway, please don't hesitate to tell me if there's still
>> any problem, I'm glad to help to do it better. I really need it.
>
> Sorry for the delay, but I'm having second thoughts about whether this
> is the right approach. Perhaps we should instead make a set of
> commitments that certain basic operations like scheme evaluation, heap
> allocation, and basic scheme procedures will leave 'errno' unchanged.
Okay, I finally decided to go ahead and add 'errno' support to the FFI
directly. Pushed in commit ee3381c94d389d923591dcb610bac9ecfd68e6a4 to
stable-2.0. If you could make sure it works for your use cases, I'd be
grateful.
I'm closing this bug now, but feel free to reopen if there are issues.
Thanks,
Mark
