Consider this simple exmple with fluids and reodos via propmts,
(define (f x)
(let ((s (make-fluid 0)))
(with-fluids ((s 0))
(let lp ((i 0))
(cond ((>= i 100) (fluid-ref s))
((= i 50) (abort-to-prompt 'tag) (lp (+ i 1)))
(else (flui
I grabbed 2.0.7 to see if it was fixed here and it appears to be.
Apologies if I was re-reporting an existing bug that was both known about
and fixed.
On 23 March 2013 18:41, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote:
> Consider this simple exmple with fluids and reodos via propmts,
>
> (define (f x)
> (let ((s (make-fluid 0)))
> (with-fluids ((s 0))
> (let lp ((i 0))
>(cond ((>= i 100) (fluid-ref s))
> ((= i 50)
I would expect
(k) to be the same. Otherwise fluids would not mix well with undo redo sematics.
But I do understand that people might have decided that it should work
like this.
and knowing the this semantic, one can fix the problem. If the
semantics is correct
I really can't find an example where
Ok, I've been meditating over this question and really I can't find a
single use case where the
current behavior is prefered with an optimized path and the more
natural behavior
where undo and redo works is dismissed as a faulty semantics with a
slow path. But not only this if my
suggested change t
On Sat 23 Mar 2013 11:41, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
writes:
> The reason is that when the with-fluid returns normally it does a full
> swap. It should only do half a swap e.g. restore the old value of the
> fluid and not store the current which is of non use because it can not
> be reached anymore
Well yes you can actually. You can change and keep at the same time :-)
I really agree that the current setup is what we got and may have merit
but the problem is I have not find any uses of it. I would be glad to
be wrong here
but you all keep throwing a theoretical argument against it and just d
Hi John,
johnanth...@lavabit.com writes:
> I grabbed 2.0.7 to see if it was fixed here and it appears to be.
Excellent, thanks for letting us know!
> Apologies if I was re-reporting an existing bug that was both known about
> and fixed.
No need to apologize. Thanks for taking the time to file
