Another alternative is to eliminate utabmd.scm altogether, which I've just finished doing.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Taylor R Campbell<[email protected]> wrote: > If the user has no permission to read some directory in the pathname > returned by the MICROCODE-TABLES-FILENAME primitive, the procedure > RE-READ-MICROCODE-TABLES! fails, even if the subsequent microcode > identification would match. This is because FILE-EXISTS? signals an > error when it can't tell whether the file exists. Using FILE-EXISTS? > in the first place leads to a race condition anyway, but probably we > don't care much about that. > > Is it safe to use the condition system in RE-READ-MICROCODE-TABLES!, > or should there be a variant of FILE-EXISTS? that means not so much > `does this file exist?' but `give me #T if this file exists, and #F > for any other state of affairs'? > > > _______________________________________________ > MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel > _______________________________________________ MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel
