Gary Houston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This behaviour can be got back by explicitly calling SCM_ASYNC_TICK from
> the handler, but I'm not sure if this was what you wanted to avoid with
> the posix threads change:
Intuitively, I would like to call SCM_ASYNC_TICK from take_signal, but
I don't know the consequences. Mikael?
Maybe it would be OK to just call SCM_ASYNC_TICK for signals that can
not be ignored (that is, replace the call to raise with SCM_ASYNC_TICK
in Gary's second variant).
I want Guile to handle signals that happen in dynamically linked C
code as gracefully as possible. My situation is this: I have a
simulation engine written in Guile that can dynamically load
user-written simulation models. These models are written in C++. I
don't want a bug in such a module to take down the simulator. I know
that this desire is quite naive, but I'd like to get as close as
possible.
