On 27 Jun 2000, Andreas J. Koenig wrote:
> > 1. StackTrace - This provides a stacktrace object very similar to what you
>
> Good idea. What about Devel::StackTrace. It will be used to develop
> code, not in other situations, so Devel:: seems appropriate.
Hmm, I'm not sure I like Devel:: all that much (though I can live with
it) because it conceivably has more use then just development. For
example, maybe you always want to log traces on errors no matter in
production or not. On the other hand, the introspection-ish nature
(that's a word, right?) does lend it towards the Devel:: hierarchy.
> Last week I suggested to Matt Sergeant for his Exception module:
>
> Maybe call it Exception::Simple, then we can recommend future
> implementors of Exception modules to collect their alternatives in
> the Exception:: namespace.
I saw that (after I emailed you). See what I mean about a read-only feed
being useful (ref to other message from today) ;)
> How would you like Exception::Class and Exception::Class::Base? I'd
> avoid using unregistered root namespaces internally--after all
> namespace clashes could happen there and will probably be hard to
> diagnose.
That's a good point. I can live with those namespaces. I kind of like
Class::Exceptions though because the module is all about declaring
exceptions (which is really about magically creating exception
classes).
The reason I chose BaseException is that I kind of like the Java standard
of FooBarException style names rather than Exception::Foo::Bar. It just
seems more descriptive and you get the important info first (error type,
followed by subtype(s) followed the generic fact that its an exception).
OTOH, its not very perlish.
Back to Class::Exceptions. If I wanted to use this and rename the
internal class BaseException to Class::Exceptions::Base then that name
sucks hard.
The other possibility is Exception::Declare (except it really should be
Exceptions::Declare).
Ugh, this is making my brain hurt.
> It isn't unlikely that if there will ever be "official" Perl
> exceptions, then they will be in the Exception namespace. For that
> reason I'd like to reserve that. But gathering the candidates in one
> or a few common directory/ies seems sensible to me.
I agree that this makes sense.
Ok, in light of the greater good of getting all this stuff in the same
place I'll go with
Devel::StackTrace
Exception::Class
Exception::Class::Base
I can always use whatever names I want for the magically declared ones.
I'll delete the stuff I uploaded earlier today (in the other namespaces I
originally mentioned) and send new ones in the right namespace.
BTW, can you guys get rid of Pete Seibel's way way defunct
Exceptions.pm? It doesn't work at all with recent Class::MethodMaker
releases and its kind of distracting, espcially since Error.pm does what
Exceptions.pm used to.
And also BTW, shouldn't Error.pm become Exception::TryCatch or something
like that? Because of the name it took me about a bazillion years or so
(+/- 1) to find out it existed.
Of course, it includes something called Error::Simple which should
probably be Exception::Simple but Matt already has that.
Anyway, all this is to say that it would be nice to have some general
cleanup of the Exception related modules so that we could present all the
possibilities and also work on making them work together (my declaration
code could easily work with Error, for example, and it might be nice to
have them cross-reference each other).
-dave
/*==================
www.urth.org
We await the New Sun
==================*/
