Hi Manuel, according to the POSIX definition of send(2) and sendto(2), for this occasion the dedicated return code EPIPE is provided. This makes SIGPIPE redundant behaviour in the first place: the error ends up in a &io-write-error anyway (or could be delegated to a specialized exception).
IMHO, having to add a signal handler here is nothing to expect from a high level language. Also, there is not much useful to do from the signal handler's context (as opposed to the exception handler), unless stateful globals were introduced. And if uncaught, a client can easily tear down a server, for example. Besides, many other Schemes already ignore this signal. Therefore I believe it would really make sense to have Bigloo do signal (SIGPIPE, SIG_IGN); between socket initialization and shutdown. What do you think? Regards, Robert Am 04.12.2013 09:25, schrieb Sven Hartrumpf: > Hi. > > MS: >> SIGPIPE is a signal, not an error code. Hence, you should rather install >> a signal handler for catching it. Try something as: >> >> (signal sigpipe (lambda (n) (print "GOT IT"))) > > This works perfectly. > Thanks for your help, Manuel! > > Ciao > Sven >
