Re: Error Handling
- Posted by Jeffrey Fielding <JJProg at cyberbury.net> Mar 17, 2001
- 646 views
I would rather use simple error return codes, like for open. I think, for example, that this: integer fn fn = open("thefile","w") if fn = -1 then -- do something end if -- a bunch of statements here Looks a lot better than: integer fn fn = open("thefile","w") -- A bunch of statements here on error do -- do something Jeff Fielding ----- Original Message ----- From: "Derek Parnell" <ddparnell at bigpond.com> To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com> Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2001 8:06 AM Subject: Re: Error Handling > Excellent David. Exception handling under the control of the application is > the highest priority enhancement required in Euphoria, then comes namespace > resolution, and the 'C' translator is not a priority at all for me. > > If I can add to David's excellent suggestion (quoted in full below), the > application might need to know exactly which exception occurred to trigger > the "on error do" block. So something like Basic's "err" or C's "errno" > could be set by Euphoria just prior to invoking the "on error" block. Also, > the code in there might need a way to resume execution or to retry the > statement that caused it. This is sounding a lot like Basic's error handling > now. But a "resume" and a "retry" statement could be needed. > > Still another idea would be to allow application generated exceptions to be > handled in the same manner. Maybe via a "raise <exceptionnumber>" statement. > > ------ > Derek Parnell > Melbourne, Australia > "To finish a job quickly, go slower."