Also (and again FWIW), I see what you are saying as "the OS is also good at killing things" which is certainly true. You could just do it that way all the time in fact!<div> </div><div>Robby <div> On Saturday, April 5, 2014, Robby Findler <<a href="mailto:robby@eecs.northwestern.edu">robby@eecs.northwestern.edu</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> It is not a difficult change to the code I saw to get this to always work. FWIW. On Saturday, April 5, 2014, Greg Hendershott <<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','greghendershott@gmail.com');" target="_blank">greghendershott@gmail.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">> What if you do this: > > (let l () (with-handlers ([void (l)]) (l))) > > This catches `exn:break` (and everything else) and calls `l`. Then I would type C-c C-k yes to kill the buffer. :) And then I would re-read the documentation for `with-handlers`, which recommends not to do that. :) Seriously: > Robby's answers in this thread are about exactly that -- DrRacket is > very robust against bad behavior by user programs. The "Programming > Languages as Operating Systems" paper is about exactly these > questions. Yes, and it's impressive, and I'm relieved that I don't need to go to those lengths. As Spencer pointed out, the spirit of this is more like xrepl. In fact, I could probably just use xrepl if it had a ,run command like this (as an alternative to ,enter). (If I can ever sort this out cleanly enough to do so, I'll submit a PR to add that.) </blockquote> </blockquote></div></div>