Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Marius Vollmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> If there might be non-local exits, scm_frame_critical_section can be >> used instead. > > If an error occurs and a lazy-catch executes, is the mutex unlocked > for that handler?
No. Good point. Hmm. I haven't thought about lazy catches at all, yet... They are like asyncs but can not be blocked. But, they are not as much uncontrolled as asyncs. The important point here is that a critical section is not reentered when it is not designed to allow this. When a lazy handler tries to reenter it, an error is signalled when scm_frame_critical_section is used with a non-recursive mutex. I think this is appropriate. > The ones I've spotted are (I might have posted this before), > > gethostbyname > getpwuid > setpwent (etc) > getgrgid > setgrent (etc) > setlocale > scm_mem2symbol > > or scm_i_mem2symbol or whatever it is now. I probably won't get a > chance to actually do anything about these. Thanks, I'll check them. -- GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3 331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405 _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
