[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Chicken-users] replace signal with sigaction

From: Jörg F . Wittenberger
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] replace signal with sigaction
Date: 29 Sep 2011 17:18:56 +0200

On Sep 29 2011, John Cowan wrote:

Alan Post scripsit:

It used to be one tested for sigaction in the same way you might
test for other features.  I'm not sure if chicken runs on a
platform that doesn't have sigaction--do I need to add a feature
test for this and preserve the existing capability on platforms
without sigaction?

Win32 systems (not including Cygwin) have signal() but not sigaction().
The only signals on Win32 are SIGABRT, SIGFPE, and SIGSEGV.  SIGILL and
SIGTERM can be trapped, but they can only happen if you raise them
yourself with raise().  SIGINT can also be trapped, but that's a bad
idea, because the handler will be run on a separate Win32 thread.

Too bad.  I forgot.  It's been quite a while that I considered Win32.

Could we live with a conditional compilation here?  (I'm *not* sure.
It complicates thing quite a lot.  Let alone readability of the source.)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]