Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> writes: > Looks like there were many hands at work in the function that is > causing the trouble. Kathy, Eli, Mike, and John all worked on the > function run-and-check (and now me). Some questions/comments: > > -- the call to exn? in that with handlers should probably be > exn:fail?. The only difference here is probably that breaks will not > be handled (when it is exn:fail?) which means that clicking the stop > button won't make the code go into this handler, which seems like a > good thing. I have committed this change. > > -- the "uncaught exn: #f" message seems to stem from the fact that the > body of this function always calls (raise #f) when a test case fails. > I have no idea why it does that, but I changed (raise exn) to (when > exn (raise exn)). Someone who knows this code (if a single such a > person exists) should probably check that over. This is what I did to > fix PR 10438. I have also committed this change, but in a second > commit.
I'll look into the remaining issue either this afternoon (i.e. in a few hours) or tomorrow. -- Cheers =8-} Mike Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev
