[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: proposed getitimer and setitimer functions
From: |
Rob Browning |
Subject: |
Re: proposed getitimer and setitimer functions |
Date: |
07 Jul 2001 11:56:17 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 |
Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:
> (multiple values are in R5RS)
Oh, right. I knew that at one point, but had forgotten...
> Yes, and I hope to adopt more Common Lispish semantics in the future
> in that you can silently ignore additional return values. The current
> implementation of values and call-with-values is not really the Right
> Thing, I'd say.
So do we want to use multiple values here? Does anyone have a good
argument either way? It could make it cheap for a compiler to toss
the additional prev-timer value. It's too bad a multiple value
returning function can't tell during execution which values the caller
will actually use :>
--
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C 64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD
- proposed getitimer and setitimer functions, Rob Browning, 2001/07/06
- Re: proposed getitimer and setitimer functions, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2001/07/06
- Re: proposed getitimer and setitimer functions, Marius Vollmer, 2001/07/07
- Re: proposed getitimer and setitimer functions, Rob Browning, 2001/07/07
- Re: proposed getitimer and setitimer functions, Marius Vollmer, 2001/07/12
- Re: proposed getitimer and setitimer functions, Rob Browning, 2001/07/13
- Re: proposed getitimer and setitimer functions, Marius Vollmer, 2001/07/22
- Re: proposed getitimer and setitimer functions, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2001/07/07
- Re: proposed getitimer and setitimer functions, Marius Vollmer, 2001/07/07
- Re: proposed getitimer and setitimer functions, Matthias Koeppe, 2001/07/13