+1 on the principle. I am a little concerned about the name. Of course
the name `unwind-protect' is entrenched in CL. But the name doesn't show
the connection with Scheme's dynamic-wind. Would `dynamic-wind-once' be
a better choice? -- vincent
- Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
- Re: Unwind-protect Shiro Kawai
- Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
- Re: Unwind-protect Shiro Kawai
- Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
- Re: Unwind-protect Shiro Kawai
- Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
- Re: Unwind-protect Shiro Kawai
- Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
- Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
- Re: Unwind-protect Vincent Manis
- Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
- Re: Unwind-protect Vincent Manis
- Re: Unwind-protect Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
- Re: Unwind-protect Arthur A. Gleckler