[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Scheme-reports] confusing example in 6.11. Exceptions

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 2:32 PM, leppie <xacc.ide@x> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 5:33 AM, Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x> wrote:
That to me means the effect of the with-exception-handler
is to raise an exception handled by some top-level handler.
However, the example says the _expression_ evaluates to <unspecified>
- i.e. it should actually return.

Yes, that's what will happen - I'll fix that.

Dont miss the line on the next page.

"After printing, the second example then raises another ex-

My understanding is that it will not return.

Yes, the prose in the R7RS draft is correct.  The
only confusion was the "=> unspecified" in the example.
Has this changed in any way in R7RS from how R6RS and SRFI-34 works?

No, the R7RS exception system is identical to R6RS.


Scheme-reports mailing list