On 3/7/2019 6:50 PM, Jack Firth wrote:
Question for synchronizable event experts: why is there no `break-evt`? The existence of `sync/enable-break` suggests to me that it is possible to have mutually exclusive choice between synchronizing on an event or raising a break. And we have an analogous construct for `sync/timeout` in the form of `alarm-evt`. Is there something about breaks that makes this idea impossible?
Break is an exception. You can send it deliberately to a thread (see *break-thread*).
Just out of curiosity: how would you use a break event? George -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
