Re: 1.6.0 and guardians

[Michael Livshin]

Dirk Herrmann <address@hidden> writes:

> since we are approaching 1.6.0, I suddenly remember a point that might be
> important for 1.6.0:  Michael has done a great re-implementation of
> guardians as it became clear that Dybvig's definition of guardians has
> some weak points.  In that re-implementation round, however, Michael has
> introduced two kinds of guardians for experimental reasons.

not really for experimental reasons, but for completeness.  it's no
big deal keeping both kinds, and I can imagine situations where each
kind is useful.

> IMO, we should revise the interface or at least add a note about the
> current interface to be experimental.

I'm rather of the opinion that the less done with that thing, the
better.  I wonder who uses it.

-- 
Shit doesn't hurt the world.  It provides valuable fertilizer to help
plants grow, grass to help cows, and at least 33% of the content of
off-brand chocolates.           --Dave Lynch in rec.music.progressive