[R6RS] Re: smaller condition hierarchy

Michael Sperber sperber at informatik.uni-tuebingen.de
Mon Jul 24 12:24:53 EDT 2006

Here's my suggestion on the smaller condition hierarchy, starting from
Matthew's proposal:

      &non-continuable   ; handler wasn't expected to return
      &i/o (see below)
        &no-infinities   ; cannot represent +inf.0, -inf.0
        &no-nans         ; cannot represent +nan.0, -nan.0, nan.0

I've made three changes to Matthews proposal:

- I've dropped &network, as we don't have any networking functionality
  in R6RS.

- I've re-added &implementation-restriction, &no-infinities, &no-nans.
  (And I assume we expect those to be continuable.)

- I think it makes sense to have finer granularity for I/O errors, as
  these might actually have different handlers.  Here's what the
  current SRFI 79 and 81 drafts have, with slightly different names:

    &i/o-port (has a port field)
    &i/o-filename (has a filename field)

Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla

More information about the R6RS mailing list