[snip]
-----Original Message-----
From: Chaim Frenkel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 12:43 AM
To: Tony Olekshy
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shared lexical scope.
Could you tell me why you would want two finallys?
Why not put them into one?
<chaim>
[/snip]
I think the point is that a statment in the first finally block could throw,
which would halt execution of that (first) finally block, at that point.
Reguardless of weather that were caught the following finally block would be
executed.
try { &punt }
catch { &punt_again }
finally { &keeps_punting }
finally { &does_this_anyway }
I may well have missed somthing, but that's what I think Tony was aiming
for.
-Corwin
