Probably you wanted a prompt in that case. Robby
On Friday, October 8, 2010, Neil Van Dyke <n...@neilvandyke.org> wrote: > Should "racket/base" include something like "unwind-protect"? > > The documentation could warn about what this restricts. > > I feel bad every time I use "dynamic-wind" to approximate "unwind-protect", > pretending that I don't have first-order continuations. But often I'm > cleaning up one-shot external resources anyway. "unwind-protect" would be > more explicit about the assumptions than "dynamic-wind" would, and > incidentally would be tidier in the code. > > Jay McCarthy wrote at 10/08/2010 07:40 PM: > > I use dynamic-wind for this. If there is something better, I don't know what > it is. dynamic-wind is a little bit funny though because if you capture > continuations then the in/out handlers can run multiple times which might > defy your expectations. You could set up a continuation barrier on the inside > to ensure that doesn't happen though. > > > > > -- > http://www.neilvandyke.org/ > _________________________________________________ > For list-related administrative tasks: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users > _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
