Ryan Hill wrote: > On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:56:41 +0100 > David Leverton <levert...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> Does anyone have any opinions on which of the four options (#1 >> make die respect nonfatal, #2 make die always die, #3 add a new >> die variant that respects nonfatal, #4 make regular die respect >> nonfatal, and add a new variant that doesn't) we should go with? >> We should definitely get this resolved and agreed on before EAPI >> 3 is finalised. > > I'd like die to respect nonfatal. People using nonfatal should check > beforehand that the functions they're calling won't do anything stupid if > die's are ignored.
If you're doing that then it might be wise to add an 'assert' helper that is guaranteed to generate an exception regardless of 'nonfatal' status. -- Thanks, Zac
