[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

# Re: suspend() and resume(INT, ERR)

- Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 05:22:38 PST
- From:
- Cc: MOO-Cows <moo-cows@parc.xerox.com>
- In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 05 Feb 1997 07:17:55 PST." <v01530501af1e51ce289f@[150.203.131.233]>

    In message <v01530501af1e51ce289f@[150.203.131.233]>, Matthew Sanderson writes:
    > As far as I can see, by testing, supplying a second arg of type ERR to
    > resume() results in the call to suspend in the task being resumed _raising_
    > that error, instead of _returning_ it.
    >
    Sorry if this sounds silly (I just started using the error-raising stuff),
    but is there a reason to return errors rather than raising them ?

    Michel Lavondes (lavondes@tidtest.total.fr), speaking only for himself

    "Yea, the heavens shall open and the NP-complete solution be given forth.
    ATT executives shall give birth to two-headed operating systems, and
    copyrights shall be expunged. The voice of the GNU shall be heard, but
    the faithless will be without transceivers." -- Steve Simmons

References:

- suspend() and resume(INT, ERR)

- From: m.sanderson@bohm.anu.edu.au (Matthew Sanderson)

- Prev: Re: suspend() and resume(INT, ERR)
- Next: this:secure_call_or_command...
- Index: MOO-cows
- Thread: MOO-cows

Home | Subject Index | Thread Index