[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: continuation barriers
From: |
Neil Jerram |
Subject: |
Re: continuation barriers |
Date: |
Wed, 26 Aug 2009 22:24:29 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) |
Linas Vepstas <address@hidden> writes:
> i.e. I'd like something like this to work:
>
> scm_c_eval_string(" ... (call/cc (lambda (k) (set! *myk* k))) ...");
> ... some_c_code(...);
> scm_c_eval_string(" ... (*myk* 42) ...");
I think there are a couple of problems here.
The first is as you've noted, that scm_c_eval_string() has a
scm_c_with_continuation_barrier() hiding inside it. You can avoid
that by using some other method for calling from C into Scheme, for
example:
(define (entry-point code)
... set up whatever catches you want around the
code that is going to be evaluated, e.g. for
debugging ...
(eval (with-input-from-string code read) (current-module))
...)
SCM entry_point_proc = SCM_VARIABLE_REF (scm_c_lookup ("entry-point"));
scm_call_1 (entry_point_proc, code_string);
The second is that you almost certainly don't want the continuation
call to make C think it is returning again from the first scm_call_1
(). That kind of thing tends to confuse C code :-)
I solved that problem (when I wanted to do something very like what
you're doing) with an approach like this:
(define current-c-code-continuation #f)
(define (entry-point code)
(call/cc (lambda (k)
(set! current-c-code-continuation k)
... set up ... (as above) ...
(eval (with- ...) ...)
... (as above)
(current-c-code-continuation))))
> I think (I haven't yet tried) that the above can work if I wrap
> the whole darn thing with scm_with_guile() .. but is there
> some way of getting the above to run without a big wrap
> of this kind?
I don't think the above qualifies as "without a big wrap". But it did
work.
Regards,
Neil