On Tue, 27 Jun 2000, Graham Barr wrote:
> If you are to discuss anything it should be open. Why have subscriber-post-only ?
Because if you don't care enough to subscribe then you shouldn't be able
to post. That's just my general mailing list philosophy (and it helps
prevent some random spam I think).
> > I strongly disagree. As try/catch is not built into Perl
>
> Yet. Last year there was the intent to have it so that it would look like
> it was built in. Pushing the API levels down does not give that impression.
Ugh. But that's only IMHO. I really think the try/catch stuff is
superfluous given eval {}/$@->isa. All that's missing is finally I
suppose but that's not hard to do either.
eval { MayCauseException(); };
my $e = $@;
finally_do_something();
if ($e->isa('Foo')) { ... }
The rest is syntactic sugar. Some people may want it, some may not.
> While I welcome discussion, I would just like to restate that there has been a *lot*
> of discussion on this in the past. But there are too many people who are passionate
> about the exception handling in some other language and want perl to mimic it.
> The result is that you never get a concensus, at least we never have in the
> past.
Ok, but I'm not sure see I see a better way for you to organize this
besides total dictatorial mandate, in which case I might as well give up
and go home. I honestly don't think its fair for you to say that your
implementation should be the top-level without some discussion (although
maybe this discussion already happened and I'm just a latecomer?). A
mailing list seems well suited to this. [EMAIL PROTECTED] is extremely not
suited for this, seeing as how very few people who aren't the core
[EMAIL PROTECTED] people will ever see our discussion.
-dave
/*==================
www.urth.org
We await the New Sun
==================*/
