Richard Kelsey scripsit:

> Summary: The continuation used when 'guard' re-raises an exception
> isn't specified.

Formal Comment ticket #431 filed.

>   "If every cond's test evaluates to #f and there is no else clause,
>   then raise-continuable is re-invoked on the raised object within the
>   dynamic environment of the original call to raise except that the
>   current exception handler is that of the guard expression."

The reference to `raise-continuable` here appears to be an editorial
error.  On the second ballot, the WG adopted the R6RS version of `guard`,
which specifies `raise` rather than `raise-continuable`.  I have fixed
this on trunk.

> Also, the original call might have been raise or raise-continuable.

Also changed on trunk.

I am therefore closing this ticket.  If you think there is more to do
here, let me know.

--
John Cowan     http://ccil.org/~cowan    cowan@ccil.org
Monday we watch-a Firefly's house, but he no come out.  He wasn't home.
Tuesday we go to the ball game, but he fool us.  He no show up.  Wednesday he
go to the ball game, and we fool him.  We no show up.  Thursday was a
double-header.  Nobody show up.  Friday it rained all day.  There was no ball
game, so we stayed home and we listened to it on-a the radio.  --Chicolini

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports