Re: [Chicken-users] wrong number of arguments to continuation when escaping?

[Peter Bex]

On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 06:43:06AM +0200, Marco Maggi wrote:
> I do not understand why some place expects 1 argument.  The problem goes
> away if I replace:
> 
>    (escape)
> 
> with:
> 
>    (escape 1)

Hi Marco,

This is a known "issue", see #1390 and #1601.  Improving this so
that such non-explicit "value" continuations accept different argument
counts would have a big impact on performance because every single
continuation would then need to start checking its argument count.

It's unfortunate, but easy to fix; just use something like "receive"
or "call-with-values" to explicitly allow the continuation to handle
multiple values.

Cheers,
Peter

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature