At 7:58 on 11/06/2002 +0100, Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Josh Wilmes wrote: > > > > I agree. However, the point is fairly moot.. If we're going to do a > > Parrot_on_exit, it's just as easy to provide our own Parrot_exit and not > > need atexit() either.. it's not like atexit() is giving us much at that > > point. > > > ... which would mean, that internal_exception needs an Parrot_interp* > argument - which it will need anyway to do something useful finally. > Not necessarily... I was thinking that Parrot_exit/Parrot_on_exit would have the same signatures as their libc equivalents. There should not be a need to introduce an interpreter in Parrot_exit().. It wouldn't hurt, but I don't think it's particularly necessary, if each interpreter has registered an on_exit handler.. --Josh
