() ri...@happyleptic.org
() Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:24:00 +0200
Sorry I did not report the problem very well. The trouble is not with
fork itself but with open-process, which is not actually part of the
runtime but rather part of ice-9 popen module.
Perhaps an object property could be added
-[ Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 10:35:20PM +0800, Nala Ginrut ]
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 8:50 PM, wrote:
>
> #4 fork does not close all open files.
> >
>
> well, I got the same question, will fork auto close in Guile or should I
> close it myself?
Sorry I did not report the problem very well. The
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 8:50 PM, wrote:
#4 fork does not close all open files.
>
well, I got the same question, will fork auto close in Guile or should I
close it myself?
Hello !
I'm still annoyed by the runtime bugs related to ports/threads at work,
so I can devote some time to work on it.
So far, the pending problems are, in order of importance for me :
#1 ports are not thread safe (and any other thread safety issues) ;
#2 fork may freeze in some occurrence ;
#
-[ Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:36:44PM +0100, Richard Shann ]
> I have defined a function with one needed and one optional arg, using
>
> scm_c_define_gsubr (name, 2, 0, 0, callback);
You mean :
scm_c_define_gsubr (name, 1, 1, 0, callback);
don't you ?
> The problem is that the compiler, while compiling test.scm, sees no
> syntax declaration of `without-exception', and therefore assumes that
> `without-exception' is simply a top-level variable.
So, according to you, should I fill a bug report or I am overusing the
load directive ?
