Re: [Chicken-users] Safe interrupt handlers?

[Kon Lovett]

On Feb 26, 2007, at 8:02 AM, John Cowan wrote:

> Tony Sidaway scripsit:
>
> > An interrupt handler written in Chicken Scheme probably can't do a  
> > lot
> > without knocking over a heap of dominoes.
> >
> > Nevertheless, would a simple lambda that only changes a top level  
> > flag
> > variable be stable enough to be useful?  This is often all that posix
> > interrupt handlers written in C do anyway.

Yes.

> The trouble is that Posix signal handlers have to return, and Chicken
> procedures don't return.  You are probably better off writing the  
> handler
> and its associated flag in C, and then using define-foreign- 
> variable to
> get access to the flag from Scheme code.

Writing signal handlers in Chicken Scheme works fine. I use the posix  
unit signal handler API in the testbase egg for resource limit  
violation catching. (testbase-posix-rlimit.scm)

> --
> Ambassador Trentino: I've said enough. I'm a man of few words.
> Rufus T. Firefly: I'm a man of one word: scram!
>         --Duck Soup                     John Cowan <address@hidden>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chicken-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users