understood. Thank you! --- Vlad Kozin <[email protected]>
On Oct 4, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > The port value is GC'ed, but you have to explicitly close it, or use > `custodian-shutdown-all`, to free the underlying resources. See the > docs here: > http://www.cs.utah.edu/plt/snapshots/current/doc/reference/ports.html > > Sam > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Vlad Kozin <[email protected]> wrote: >> got it. But just to confirm port-values in Racket are subject to gc, right? >> --- >> Vlad Kozin <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> On Oct 3, 2013, at 6:20 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Vlad Kozin <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Got it. Thanks Sam. >> >> >> Have a question that I just forgot to ask. There's a reason I have >> >> (let*-values ..) instead of definitions: >> >> >> There isn't a difference between the code you wrote an what I wrote -- >> using `define` inside another context just gets transformed into `let` >> or `let-values`. >> >> Sam >> >>
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
