A brief update on this: I went with Ryan's approach and used an
implementation of guarded-block throughout Rebellion's codebase. You can
see the diff here: https://github.com/jackfirth/rebellion/pull/466. A
couple of things to note:
- I added a define/guard form that's like define, but with
On Sat, 31 Oct 2020 03:25:32 -0700 (PDT),
"jackh...@gmail.com"
wrote:
>Wow, these are a lot of great responses. First of all, *awesome* job Ryan.
>That implementation is exactly what I needed to figure out. I'm definitely
>starting there first.
>
>> Are you looking for `let/ec`?
>
>I'd
Wow, these are a lot of great responses. First of all, *awesome* job Ryan.
That implementation is exactly what I needed to figure out. I'm definitely
starting there first.
> Are you looking for `let/ec`?
I'd forgotten about that one. That has the *syntax* I want. However my
issue with
Hi racketeers,
I would second this suggestion. Although it might look slightly
un-rackety at first sight, for certain types of code flow it does the
job really well.
And most importantly - I am using escape continuations in much wilder
setup (yes, futures) and it imposes no noticeable
Are you looking for `let/ec`?
(let/ec return
(define x (random 10))
(unless (even? x)
(log-info "x wasn't even, x = ~a" x)
(return -1))
(define y (random 10))
(unless (even? y)
(log-info "y wasn't even, y = ~a" y)
(return -1))
(+ x y))
Alex.
On Wednesday, October 28,
5 matches
Mail list logo
