From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id RAA10057 for caml-redistribution; Fri, 28 May 1999 17:06:25 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA00079 for ; Thu, 27 May 1999 21:11:02 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04311; Thu, 27 May 1999 21:10:53 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from xleroy@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id VAA01861; Thu, 27 May 1999 21:10:53 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <19990527211053.33463@pauillac.inria.fr> Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 21:10:53 +0200 From: Xavier Leroy To: John Skaller , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: more patches (for Unix signal mask) References: <19990518181020.A24993@hoedic.trusted-logic.fr> <5vbM3S6mM$17V$1@joerch.org> <3.0.6.32.19990526011623.00a6ac30@triode.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89.1 In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19990526011623.00a6ac30@triode.net.au>; from John Skaller on Wed, May 26, 1999 at 01:16:23AM +1000 Sender: weis > Synchronous exceptions present enough difficulties without > asychronous ones. A possible systemic difference is that > while it is common to make synchronous exceptions equivalent > to non-local gotos, that is, there's no retry, asynchronous exceptions > should probably permit continuation. Actually, that's how signal handlers work in Caml (like in C): a user-specified function is called at the earliest possible moment. However, that function may choose to raise an exception (that's what I called and asynchronous exception), and that's where the problems Joerg mentioned occur. - Xavier Leroy