SASADA Koichi wrote:
> I understand what you want.
> In my ticket, I proposed two things.
> (1) Introducing the concept to "interrupt control"
> (2) Introducing primitives to achieve (1)
> Maybe you proposed
> (3) Extra APIs to use (1) and (2) in easy way
> (or (2)?)
> I want to make clear and fix the (1) and (2) before (3).
> How about it?
I agree, I want (3) :)
I'm not sure if the current primitives make it possible to implement (3)
> A Trivial point. `res' in block is not a variable (it parsed as method)
> because the assignment of res (res = ...) is placed after the block.
Oops, yes, I often forget to declare variables :x
> One idea is extending ensure semantics.
> I'm not sure how to design it....
> We need more ideas.
What if ensure is made to support parameters?
ensure Exception => :never