[r6rs-discuss] Compile-time detection of contract violations
andre at het.brown.edu
Tue Oct 31 13:59:49 EST 2006
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006, Michael Sperber wrote:
> Yes, but the previous wording suggested that an exception with
> condition type &syntax might be raised for *any* violation, not just
> syntax violations.
But then the suggested modification:
"implementations are encouraged to raise &syntax exceptions for syntax
violations detected at those times"
would be wrong, since they are in fact /required/ to do so.
I might also point out that
> (lambda (exit)
> (with-exception-handler (lambda (x) (exit 1) (lambda () (cons 1 2 3))))))
> which returns 1.
seems to be in conflict with the interpretation of another editor in the
More information about the r6rs-discuss