On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 11:35 AM, José Mejuto <joshy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello FPC-Pascal, > > Wednesday, July 7, 2010, 3:48:13 PM, you wrote: > > AB> Martin, I didn't get to the end of your email because I find that > AB> first major part - part and parcel of why Delphi failed as a language. > AB> It became unviable because exception handling and blow-outs. Which > AB> in turn were caused by sloppy ideologies such as the standing notion > AB> here... Which is to let the blow-out occur and move on. Garbage > AB> collection was the solution to this problem. > > It's impossible to write a dogma about exceptions, some must be > handled, some could or could not be handled. Expected exceptions like > a conversion string to number should be handled and processed in that > way to recover from them (they are recoverable). > > If an exception is recoverable (program state can be passed from > unestable to stable again) it should be handled and processed. If the > handling does not garantee the stability the best option is to save > the information that can be safelly stored or processed and terminate > the process as soon as possible. It's not a matter of ideology, is a > matter of stability. Unexpected exceptions should terminate the > program as soon as possible with trying to save as much as possible. > Even in some processes an unexpected exception should revert the > program to the previous stable state (if possible) and discard all > information in memory to avoid the possibility of corrupted > information.
Exactly. I just wonder how you do in web apps that are not CGI. As I said earlier in an email here: http://lists.freepascal.org/lists/fpc-pascal/2010-July/025902.html ...but I guess that is to be reviewed, perhaps, in another thread. ;-) MD. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
